|
Post by silversurfer on Nov 29, 2004 20:39:39 GMT -5
First, the awards don't change the fact that Nebraska continues to be Big Dog in the Big 12 and Texas is FINALLY doing something other than flounder. In that case, Elliott should get COY for finally DOING something besides be mediocre.
Other than that, I don't see the big deal. Cook's not exactly Mr. Personality, and perhaps that didn't help him.
|
|
|
Post by huskervbfan on Nov 29, 2004 21:04:17 GMT -5
First, the awards don't change the fact that Nebraska continues to be Big Dog in the Big 12 and Texas is FINALLY doing something other than flounder. In that case, Elliott should get COY for finally DOING something besides be mediocre. Other than that, I don't see the big deal. Cook's not exactly Mr. Personality, and perhaps that didn't help him. I don't know how you know him but I know him somewhat personally and he is one of the nicest friendliest people I know. He certainly does what he can within the bounds of the NCAA to do everything he can for the players and the fans. He is very approachable and easy to talk to. I don't know what your grounds are for saying that but I have never seen any evidence of that and I have been around him on many occasions both on and off the court.
|
|
|
Post by vbfan on Nov 29, 2004 21:04:42 GMT -5
First, the awards don't change the fact that Nebraska continues to be Big Dog in the Big 12 and Texas is FINALLY doing something other than flounder. In that case, Elliott should get COY for finally DOING something besides be mediocre. Other than that, I don't see the big deal. Cook's not exactly Mr. Personality, and perhaps that didn't help him. I think down deep the coaches realize that this award is John's for the next 3 years when he wins the conference and Pavan will be the POY. I think the fact that coaches had not thought that Texas would be that good and they were was why Jerritt got the award. Texas relied heavily on Howden and Topic this year and it will be interesting to see how they compete next year with the likes of A&M, Missouri, and Kansas State. Nebraska is in the early stages of a dynasty that could see them win several National Titles as well as Big 12 titles in the coming years. I agree with the Silversurfer that John does not always come across as a guy you would "like" to give this award to although he definitely deserved it.
|
|
|
Post by huskervbfan on Nov 29, 2004 21:40:47 GMT -5
I think down deep the coaches realize that this award is John's for the next 3 years when he wins the conference and Pavan will be the POY. If someone else had not brought this up sooner or later, I would have because I do think this is correct. Pavan has so much untapped potential that is only beginning to come out. With the addition of Jordan Larson next year, they should be fairly solid and that will continue for a few years at least. I know either (R)uffda! or Gorf (I never can remember the difference between those Minnesota Twins) said the award was for improvement but if Cook can keep this team on the track of their potential, it will be hard not to award it to him.
|
|
|
Post by silversurfer on Nov 29, 2004 22:23:39 GMT -5
Don't get me wrong! I'm a Cook fan! Perhaps I didn't properly make my statement: Cook is not a big "people person," he's not big on "chit chat." The social thing is just not his gig.
I'm just saying maybe that didn't help. But I imagine more people voted for Elliott because Texas came out of an underachieving funk.
|
|
|
Post by bigfan on Nov 29, 2004 22:32:04 GMT -5
Don't get me wrong! I'm a Cook fan! Perhaps I didn't properly make my statement: Cook is not a big "people person," he's not big on "chit chat." The social thing is just not his gig. What do you prefer a back slapper who sticks a shiv in your back when you walk away or a straight up, upstanding man who does the best job that he can? Cook reminds me of Shoji of Hawai`i.
|
|
|
Post by Orpheus on Nov 29, 2004 22:53:04 GMT -5
Who on this board was in attendance when Texas played at Nebraska? Well, I saw the game on tv, so I don't qualify. From what I saw, I was highly impressed by the team's attitude on the court. Pavan is Pavan...However, CH was incredible, Melissa Elmer was incredible, Stalls was unstoppable. Jen S did not play like she did in Austin, but was still solid. Amanda was incredible. Busboom was tons better compared to what she looked like in Austin. Even Lynch and Rebholz were very solid. Talk about committment to winning each time you step on the court. If that's not good coaching, I don't know what is. Teaching that is something that hundreds of D1 coaches across the nation in all sports continue to struggle with. Those girls knew how to win however you break it down: chemisty, communication, consistency, unity, whatever you want to call it....they were emanating it. I'm blown away. NU will be the national champs this year (in my opinion).
|
|
|
Post by txvball on Nov 30, 2004 0:48:44 GMT -5
Quite frankly, I am not sure that the lose of Topic or Paven would have made any difference in the standings this year. There was enough talent on each team that the absence of each of them would probably not have made much difference in how each team finished -- and I am not sure that K-State would have beat each of them without those two stars. You obviously haven't seen texas then. Topic is the backbone of the team. They would have struggled without her. She is their go to player. With the same lineup but one of their other OH's there, no one would have been able to put up the numbers she did. I mean, she broke Demetria Sance's kill record. They had no one to replace her. I am not sure about Nebraska, I don't know enough about them to say that they would have still been as good without Pavan, my guess is no for her as well, b/c she has played great. Texas would have been 5th or 6th this year in conference without Topic. IMHO, Topic would have stood out even more had she not had a different setter every year at Texas, and if she had one that could deliver the ball consistently, b/c Moriarty has struggled with that this season.
|
|
|
Post by I Luv Danny R on Nov 30, 2004 1:13:59 GMT -5
Topic is not that good, She is aight but not a National POY...
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Nov 30, 2004 9:23:40 GMT -5
Topic suffers from too much success. I've seen her play many times in the last few years, and I keep seeing the same characteristic: She is a tall, powerful hitter, and because she can shred the blockers a significant portion of the game, she hasn't developed the ability to "take a look" and adjust mid-air depending on where the blockers are. Thus, when Topic is paired up against an equally tall RS with the smarts to set the block and the speed to follow the sets (i.e. Pavan), she's ineffective.
Contrast this with Stacey Gordon, who is five inches shorter but has a much more impressive output, undoubtedly because she HAS to hit strong and smart or she will get roofed.
|
|
|
Post by txvball on Nov 30, 2004 9:37:55 GMT -5
That's ridiculous. She sees the block very well. You can't have that many kills without that. She turns around the block all of the time, and uses the block better than most hitters that i have seen. The reason she got stopped by taller blockers(I'm assuming you are a nebraska fan and judging everything by her match against them) is b/c of a breakdown in setting, getting pushed too far out, or too tight against a block that you can't do that against. I saw that Moriarty had a bad night that night in Nebraska after watching that match on tv.
|
|
|
Post by Orpheus on Nov 30, 2004 9:40:27 GMT -5
I'd say her stats prove otherwise. She tops the league in total kills, and is ranked 6th in the nation. Her percentage thus far is above 300 and at one point, was higher than any other OH in the nation. She's maintained these rankings even with a dismal performance in NU. In spite of that one match that has seems to have formed your opinion, Topic has proven herself a very effective and efficient hitter. Throw in the fact that she has had a freshman setter each of her four years all with very different styles and tempo of sets and who struggle with consistency, and that makes her ability to terminate even more impressive. The only time I see her as the way you describe her is when she is in a trap set situation, otherwise you can pretty much expect a kill.
I would LOVE to suffer from too much success. LOL
|
|
|
Post by packitwithpurple on Nov 30, 2004 10:10:57 GMT -5
You obviously haven't seen texas then. Topic is the backbone of the team. They would have struggled without her. She is their go to player. With the same lineup but one of their other OH's there, no one would have been able to put up the numbers she did. I mean, she broke Demetria Sance's kill record. They had no one to replace her. I am not sure about Nebraska, I don't know enough about them to say that they would have still been as good without Pavan, my guess is no for her as well, b/c she has played great. Texas would have been 5th or 6th this year in conference without Topic. IMHO, Topic would have stood out even more had she not had a different setter every year at Texas, and if she had one that could deliver the ball consistently, b/c Moriarty has struggled with that this season. You are all missing the point of what I said. I was actually COMPLIMENTING the rest of both teams. I think that you are belittling the other players by saying that Topic and Paven "carried" their teams. I think the two teams have a NUMBER of really "good" players, and I STILL don't think that those teams would have ended up anything other than #1 and #2 in the Big-12 no matter if they had those two players or not. Maybe their records would have been slightly different, and they may have had more 4-5 game matches, but I believe that the other players had as MUCH to do with their respective team successes as Paven and Topic. The point I was trying to make was that the POY should be someone presence makes their team a WHOLE lot better than without them. I think maybe Lindsey Hunter at Mizzou might be a good example. I doubt if they would have made the NCAAs -- certainly not hosting -- without her. If Nebraska or Texas takes the big hardware this year, it will be because of the supporting cast, not Paven or Topic. ;D
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Nov 30, 2004 11:02:35 GMT -5
Txvball and logonna make several valid comments. I should have emphasized two things:
1) I did not see the Nebraska match so I'm not sure how much Mira's low stats were due to the passer+setter part of the offensive line. Generally, Moriarty seems less error-prone than last year's setter but I accept that her output may have been subpar two weeks ago.
2) Topic is undoubtedly an excellent player who can beat 90% of the defense in DI right now and can only be challenged by another equally great player at the block [and NU seems to have plenty of those in Elmer, Stalls, and Pavan].
The latter being in short supply in the BigXII, I think, makes it easier for her to run with her killer instinct when the set is off, instead of recognizing a hopeless situation and doing the meeker thing of "keeping the ball in play and counting on your defense to give you a better shot in the next rally". Swallowing your desire to get the kill and taking the less "honorable" dink or roll option is very difficult for highly competitive personalities Yes, pushing over a free ball hurts you, but getting stuffed on a terrible set hurts your team more. When the Longhorn passing broke down against TAMU, she was either unwilling or incapable of taking the high road, and was so rattled by the constant Jones/Munsch rejection that Elliott subbed her out in the middle of the fourth game.
Of course, you can't exactly blame the UT setting for their dismal blocking matchup (5-16) against Nebraska in Lincoln.
|
|
|
Post by Orpheus on Nov 30, 2004 18:26:35 GMT -5
I just looked up the stats from the A&M match in College Station. Mira had 25 kills, second only to Laura Jones' 27. She did not play the last 4 points of the final game.
Mira Topic has accomplished and overachieved for UT her entire career. Even if you remove my bias from the equation, the facts speak for themselves.
In the middle of this season, she overtook 2nd place in career kills in Big 12 history. Three former Olympians, a handful of pro players (indoor/outdoor/foreign/domestic) and a handful of former national team members all sit behind her. She's done this in 4 years of rally scoring where the game is much quicker and there are not as many opportunities for kills as there would be in side out scoring. She's had 4 frosh setters each year. She's come back from knee surgery. She's come back from back surgery. She spent all of last year rehabbing and wasn't allowed to practice with the team, only suiting up on game days. I don't think someone could accomplish this simply on luck or without extreme talent. She is a smart player; I don't think someone who couldn't hit around a block could equal her career performance. Just ask Laura Jones how well Mira can hit around the A&M block, and how good it feels to dig with her face. Or the ds from CU. Or countless others.
Sure Mira has had her share of forgettable matches, but that shouldn't define her as a player. If that were the case, then Logan Tom would be remembered more for her piss poor performance against USC in NOLA her senior year, as opposed to the fantastic player she was her entire career. And I'm not saying Mira is Logan or even compares. It's just a matter of perspective and being sure to not overlook the highlights of what she's done as a volleyball player throughout her tenure.
|
|