|
Post by mervinswerved on Nov 26, 2018 16:37:44 GMT -5
The craziest thing about this list is that there are ZERO athletes from UNC on it. When has that ever happened?! Crazy, but very much expected.
|
|
|
Post by bayarea on Nov 26, 2018 16:39:48 GMT -5
The craziest thing about this list is that there are ZERO athletes from UNC on it. When has that ever happened?! Crazy, but very much expected. Yeah...I should have said "the most telling thing about this list..."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2018 17:02:29 GMT -5
As much as I loatheeeeeeee FSU Caffrey did deserve it....her hitting percentage and kills per match stood out fairly clearly and without her then that team would definitely not be second. She also played all rotations most of the time. Unfortunately the farthest I see the acc getting is maybe Syracuse to the round of 32 and Pitt to the sweet 16 but Michigan is not going to be easy. Also congrats to Clemson and Georgia Tech on making it to the NIVC This is the first time I ever remember UNC notbhabing anyone in any team.....but the acc better not get used to that starting next year, and that’s not just optimism. Were you watching the same FSU squad I was? I don't remember Caffrey playing 6 rotations almost ever. 1.69 digs/set is also terrible numbers if she was. 34 reception errors and she was not receiving all the time. For a while the libero was going in for Caffrey and Ambrose after Caffrey served but now it seems like Ambrose is playing 6 rotations at time?? The FSU rotation does not make sense to me, it seems that they just use a ton of subs and then inevitably have Adrian Ell and Brianne Burkert run a true 6-2 once they run out (which they do in near every set). Caffrey winning makes sense, she was almost a point/set ahead of anyone else, but her hitting percentage is not that great and she does not contribute as an all-around player in the way that Van Buskirk. Top 2 in both blocks and hitting percentage (in a conference with some great MBs) with almost 3 k/s in just 3 rotations being set mostly by a first-year setter with location issues, that's very impressive to me. There's a reason LVB was a unanimous selection while Caffrey was not. But I also am one of the "victor goes the spoils" people, so it's odd to me that Pitt did not get more recognition after th e incredibly dominant conference year they had. [ Nowhere did I say that Florida State ran a rotation that made sense. I fully agree that there are random subs and sporadic rotation changes at times. But if you look at Caffrey and her stats, they are not stellar because she is their go to hitter and every defense knows that. You cannot dispute she is a big reason FSU went from the middle of the pack past year to back near the top. It wasn’t because of Murray, Wiscinski, or any other player but Caffrey. She had several matches of 20 plus kills and single handedly carried FSU at times. Pitt has a lot of players that were all good and that probably hurt their chances. Sorry you do not like my opinion or perception. And you probably won’t like the fact that I don’t see Pitt advancing past the second weekend. In regards to more observations, I think Sauer also was robbed again. ND did not make the tournament and although Dejarld has some high numbers, Sauer is a big reason for the success of Louisville. I thought Ga Tech had too many members on teams given where they finished as well. It’s envouraging for next year that a lot of current players on the teams are not seniors and teams not having any or few members will probably add some next year
|
|
|
Post by odinaka on Nov 27, 2018 0:47:00 GMT -5
So how does Notre Dame with their record get 5 and Pitt only had 4?
|
|
|
Post by chancelucky on Nov 27, 2018 6:22:27 GMT -5
It may be that Fisher only nominated 4 players.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2018 8:53:51 GMT -5
I think ND has a bright future but not sure they needed 5 picks.....I also do not understand how GA Tech and NCSU got the picks they did. Are the voters picking based on the entire year or just conference play? Because In that case there are some weird quirks.
|
|
|
Post by topdog7 on Nov 27, 2018 9:11:33 GMT -5
You all need to take a deeper look. Caffrey wasn't even a unanimous 1st team All-ACC selection. There were coaches that didn't put her on the 1st team and she was named ACC POY, how does that happen?. Every one of Pitt's starters should've been named to an ACC team, and if not all of them, they should've at a minimum had more than Notre Dame.
|
|
|
Post by VolleyballMag on Nov 27, 2018 10:16:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by skullars on Nov 27, 2018 10:23:24 GMT -5
So how does Notre Dame with their record get 5 and Pitt only had 4? Agree. Of the list, the number of times I saw "Notre Dame" was the most confounding. Basically, according to the all-ACC, ND will rival Pitt next year for first in the conference.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2018 10:38:35 GMT -5
So how does Notre Dame with their record get 5 and Pitt only had 4? Agree. Of the list, the number of times I saw "Notre Dame" was the most confounding. Basically, according to the all-ACC, ND will rival Pitt next year for first in the conference. Yeah.....I do not see that happening either...
|
|
|
Post by odinaka on Nov 27, 2018 12:23:01 GMT -5
Great story. Too bad their featured player is the only starter they screwed out of conference recognition!
|
|
|
Post by vbdad19 on Nov 28, 2018 18:58:13 GMT -5
So is this voted on by all the coaches or a select few? And do individual coaches send in nominations from their team? According to the ACC website - The awards were based on a vote of the league’s 15 head coaches, who could not vote for their own student-athletes.
|
|
|
Post by chancelucky on Nov 28, 2018 23:42:20 GMT -5
If the system has stayed the same this year, each coach nominates his/her own players. At one time, I think there was a limit of four, but that's obviously not true now. They then vote, but can't vote for their own players. Frequently coaches will be careful about nominating too many of their own player out of fear of splitting votes too much. I don't remember if votes are maybe weighted in some way. I think it's just a straight vote total with the first 12 or so being first team. Strangely, it's pretty common in the conference for the player of the year to not be from the team that wins the league. Last year it was Stranzali and in 2014 it was Savannah Leaf. In between it was Katie George and Taylor Leath whose teams did win conference.
|
|
|
Post by skullars on Nov 30, 2018 21:56:44 GMT -5
Who wants to gloat a little over the LMU-Duke result? Blue Devils were the biggest debatable tourney pick, and they certainly backed up the reasoning for one side of that debate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2018 8:31:22 GMT -5
The ACC is done in the NCAA tourney and also for the season except Clemson, playing in the NIVC. Pitt really was exposed by a B1G team and losing Lund did not help. FSU was trounced by Floida in the first round, Louisville squeaked a set off of Illinois, Syracuse got their first tournament win ever, and Duke was ousted by LMU. So the question is....what is the direction of the ACC moving forward? We know the off season can be a time of movement for players and coaches.
Projected Standings: 1. Pitt (196 points) (14 first-place votes) 2. Louisville (180) (1 first-place vote) 3. Florida State (171) 4. Notre Dame (137) 5. Duke (134) 6. North Carolina (121) T7. Miami (117) T7. NC State (117) 9. Syracuse (110) 10. Georgia Tech (68) 11. Virginia Tech (55) 12. Clemson (54) 13. Wake Forest (51) 14. Virginia (37) 15. Boston College (27)
Actual Standings:
Pitt Florida State Louisville Syracuse Duke Notre Dame NC State Miami Clemson Georgia Tech Boston College Virginia Tech Wake Forest North Carolina Virginia
|
|