|
Post by mikevolley on May 12, 2021 11:11:19 GMT -5
Has to be some validity to the claims made by Mizzou players about the coach and his behavior. Another player in the portal from that team. Hopefully there will be an investigation.
|
|
|
Post by udubhuskiefan on May 12, 2021 11:21:06 GMT -5
Has to be some validity to the claims made by Mizzou players about the coach and his behavior. Another player in the portal from that team. Hopefully there will be an investigation. Who?
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanvbdad on May 12, 2021 11:33:00 GMT -5
Volleyball recruiting has a real chicken/egg conundrum. Don't know if there's a way to sort through it until they start playing in the NCAAs. Not sure I know what you mean. Could you please expound?
|
|
|
Post by ineedajob on May 12, 2021 11:34:24 GMT -5
Has to be some validity to the claims made by Mizzou players about the coach and his behavior. Another player in the portal from that team. Hopefully there will be an investigation. Not in the past two weeks since Omazic.
|
|
|
Post by pittpittpitt on May 12, 2021 11:48:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by king123 on May 12, 2021 12:40:15 GMT -5
Congrats Andrea! That’s a big get for WF. Hopefully she can help them be more competitive and win a few more matches.
|
|
|
Post by azvolleydad on May 12, 2021 12:45:29 GMT -5
Volleyball recruiting has a real chicken/egg conundrum. Don't know if there's a way to sort through it until they start playing in the NCAAs. Not sure I know what you mean. Could you please expound? Sure. I'm not referencing any specific recruit or player, but there's a synergy between how a recruit ends up being ranked and where they are committed. Sometimes it's hard to say which predominates, thus chicken/egg. Recruits that were offered and committed to Penn State, Florida, Texas, Nebraska, USC, etc... were inevitably ranked high on the underclass list and usually ended up ranked highly on the final senior aces/top-50 lists. Especially under the old rules, when recruits verbally committed at age 15 (or sometimes 14) and other coaches quit scouting them aggressively, a recruit's ranking was a significant product of where they "signed" at age 15 and not necessarily how college-ready they were at age 18.
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanvbdad on May 12, 2021 13:12:21 GMT -5
Not sure I know what you mean. Could you please expound? Sure. I'm not referencing any specific recruit or player, but there's a synergy between how a recruit ends up being ranked and where they are committed. Sometimes it's hard to say which predominates, thus chicken/egg. Recruits that were offered and committed to Penn State, Florida, Texas, Nebraska, USC, etc... were inevitably ranked high on the underclass list and usually ended up ranked highly on the final senior aces/top-50 lists. Especially under the old rules, when recruits verbally committed at age 15 (or sometimes 14) and other coaches quit scouting them aggressively, a recruit's ranking was a significant product of where they "signed" at age 15 and not necessarily how college-ready they were at age 18. Thanks AZ! Couldn't agree more. This is close to, but not exactly what happened in Lauren's case imo. Pretty sure Russ saw her at a 16's game (He came to check out the opposing team's setter) and was apparently impressed with her.
|
|
|
Post by Friday on May 12, 2021 13:29:31 GMT -5
Not sure I know what you mean. Could you please expound? Sure. I'm not referencing any specific recruit or player, but there's a synergy between how a recruit ends up being ranked and where they are committed. Sometimes it's hard to say which predominates, thus chicken/egg. Recruits that were offered and committed to Penn State, Florida, Texas, Nebraska, USC, etc... were inevitably ranked high on the underclass list and usually ended up ranked highly on the final senior aces/top-50 lists. Especially under the old rules, when recruits verbally committed at age 15 (or sometimes 14) and other coaches quit scouting them aggressively, a recruit's ranking was a significant product of where they "signed" at age 15 and not necessarily how college-ready they were at age 18. This is very true. Also other x-factors - like playing for a more nationally known club, what tournaments you play in, etc. can effect ranking. So many hidden gems out there that go on to college and really show out.
|
|
|
Post by vballfreak808 on May 12, 2021 13:54:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by mikevolley on May 12, 2021 13:57:48 GMT -5
Has to be some validity to the claims made by Mizzou players about the coach and his behavior. Another player in the portal from that team. Hopefully there will be an investigation. Not in the past two weeks since Omazic. Claudia Dillon
|
|
|
Post by ineedajob on May 12, 2021 14:06:30 GMT -5
Not in the past two weeks since Omazic. Claudia Dillon That was almost a month ago and she has been mentioned quite a bit in this thread
|
|
|
Post by kimdc on May 13, 2021 10:27:04 GMT -5
Not sure I know what you mean. Could you please expound? Sure. I'm not referencing any specific recruit or player, but there's a synergy between how a recruit ends up being ranked and where they are committed. Sometimes it's hard to say which predominates, thus chicken/egg. Recruits that were offered and committed to Penn State, Florida, Texas, Nebraska, USC, etc... were inevitably ranked high on the underclass list and usually ended up ranked highly on the final senior aces/top-50 lists. Especially under the old rules, when recruits verbally committed at age 15 (or sometimes 14) and other coaches quit scouting them aggressively, a recruit's ranking was a significant product of where they "signed" at age 15 and not necessarily how college-ready they were at age 18. Unfortunately, that's true in just about all sports. I suspect some of the recruiting services simply don't see a lot of players, so they default to "she must be good because xyz wants her" and "she must not be that great because xyz isn't after her."
|
|
|
Post by azvolleydad on May 13, 2021 11:14:45 GMT -5
Sure. I'm not referencing any specific recruit or player, but there's a synergy between how a recruit ends up being ranked and where they are committed. Sometimes it's hard to say which predominates, thus chicken/egg. Recruits that were offered and committed to Penn State, Florida, Texas, Nebraska, USC, etc... were inevitably ranked high on the underclass list and usually ended up ranked highly on the final senior aces/top-50 lists. Especially under the old rules, when recruits verbally committed at age 15 (or sometimes 14) and other coaches quit scouting them aggressively, a recruit's ranking was a significant product of where they "signed" at age 15 and not necessarily how college-ready they were at age 18. Unfortunately, that's true in just about all sports. I suspect some of the recruiting services simply don't see a lot of players, so they default to "she must be good because xyz wants her" and "she must not be that great because xyz isn't after her." but it was magnified in volleyball because players committed so young. That wasn’t happening to the same extent in football or basketball
|
|
|
Post by vballfreak808 on May 13, 2021 16:35:42 GMT -5
|
|