bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 13,255 
|
Post by bluepenquin on Sept 8, 2020 11:17:58 GMT -5
Going a step past this - even if no University increases scholarships next year - the supply of players eligible to play college volleyball is going to be greater than ever before for the next 4 years. The scholarships are fixed starting in 2022 and probably mostly fixed for 2021. This will trickle down to all levels - which means there will be fewer scholarships available for incoming freshman for the next 4 years. The talent level across all of D1 will be greater over the next 4 years. This sucks for many kids that will lose scholarship and playing opportunities. OTH - an influx in talent over the next 4 years I believe will lead to more parity in the sport. I think it will end up being a far smaller roster management problem than anticipated when looking at the raw numbers. Most seniors will choose to move on and/or they will not be afforded an extra year's scholarship by their program (most will then move on with their lives as opposed to transferring). All the players with pro potential will choose the money. How many Juniors, Sophomores, and Freshman are going to take the extra year? How many more Graduate transfers will there be in the next 4 years. As for current seniors - many/most may already have graduation plans and are going to be moving on. A small number have professional opportunities. There are still many that will have another year of eligibility and even if their current school doesn't afford them an extra year's scholarship - another program will? |
|
|
|
Post by huskerjen on Sept 8, 2020 14:46:41 GMT -5
All the players with pro potential will choose the money. Based on the conversations I've had with several players who will be playing pro, this is not true. They may not have a choice. I know three Big Ten coaches that have had these conversations with their players already. They're telling them the best decision is to graduate and move on. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2020 15:02:42 GMT -5
Based on the conversations I've had with several players who will be playing pro, this is not true. They may not have a choice. I know three Big Ten coaches that have had these conversations with their players already. They're telling them the best decision is to graduate and move on. I'm sure that is true and I know you're well informed regarding B1G VB. I'm sure some 2020 seniors won't have an option and ofc it will depend on the quality of the player and the 2021 expectations of the school. That said, I know of multiple 2019 AAs who are planning to apply to grad school at their current institution for the 2021 season with the encouragement and support of their coaches. Some will leave for the pro ranks, but you said all of them would. I'm simply explaining that isn't going to be the what happens. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2020 16:04:38 GMT -5
It's official, Grayce Olson to UCLA.
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 13,255
|
Post by bluepenquin on Sept 8, 2020 16:29:04 GMT -5
Based on the conversations I've had with several players who will be playing pro, this is not true. They may not have a choice. I know three Big Ten coaches that have had these conversations with their players already. They're telling them the best decision is to graduate and move on. I am guessing there are some moving parts going on here. The finances in the B1G right now may not be good enough to support the extra scholarships. Plus each team could be in a different situation. I am guessing the below are the 3 B1G coaches you are talking about? Nebraska - I would totally buy into Nebraska just saying to Sun, Strivins, and Sweet to move on. Their pipeline is so full for the years to come - I would see them saying the same thing after next year for Hames and Schwarzenbach. These are great players - but it is probably easiest and best for Nebraska to move on with their pre-COVID plan. Wisconsin - this one is harder for me follow. Haggerty, Hilley, Loberg, and Rettke are all scholarship. They only have 3 players for next year with a verbal. Seems like they would have room for at least one of those players coming back. But then the AD was pretty adamant about Basketball players last year and it may be all about AD policy. Minnesota - Minny has been another one that has been very aggressive in getting early verbal's and there is going to be a big log jam if they start giving out 5 years to some of their players. Samedy and Pittman are very good - but they are recruiting like Nebraska right now so it is probably too difficult to change from their pre-COVID plans. |
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Sept 8, 2020 17:45:45 GMT -5
It's official, Grayce Olson to UCLA. she needs to develop a bit more power on her shots, but this is a good one! the LA school recruiting is on FIRE! |
|
|
|
Post by vbfamily on Sept 8, 2020 18:10:07 GMT -5
They may not have a choice. I know three Big Ten coaches that have had these conversations with their players already. They're telling them the best decision is to graduate and move on. I am guessing there are some moving parts going on here. The finances in the B1G right now may not be good enough to support the extra scholarships. Plus each team could be in a different situation. I am guessing the below are the 3 B1G coaches you are talking about? Nebraska - I would totally buy into Nebraska just saying to Sun, Strivins, and Sweet to move on. Their pipeline is so full for the years to come - I would see them saying the same thing after next year for Hames and Schwarzenbach. These are great players - but it is probably easiest and best for Nebraska to move on with their pre-COVID plan. Wisconsin - this one is harder for me follow. Haggerty, Hilley, Loberg, and Rettke are all scholarship. They only have 3 players for next year with a verbal. Seems like they would have room for at least one of those players coming back. But then the AD was pretty adamant about Basketball players last year and it may be all about AD policy. Minnesota - Minny has been another one that has been very aggressive in getting early verbal's and there is going to be a big log jam if they start giving out 5 years to some of their players. Samedy and Pittman are very good - but they are recruiting like Nebraska right now so it is probably too difficult to change from their pre-COVID plans. I know some programs have asked some non-senior players if they would want to stay for their 5th year. Coaches are trying to figure out the distribution of scholarships, but players just don't know. I know one red-shirt sophomore that will have her Bachelor's degree this spring with THREE YEARS OF ELIGIBILITY REMAINING! Yikes, crazy stuff. The Juniors that are asked to return or transfer to another school for graduate work are the one's that take the 2022's spots. I feel like those schools that have openings, might hold those scholarships (or at least one) and see what comes available on the transfer market. |
|
|
|
Post by horns1 on Sept 8, 2020 20:10:18 GMT -5
They may not have a choice. I know three Big Ten coaches that have had these conversations with their players already. They're telling them the best decision is to graduate and move on. I am guessing there are some moving parts going on here. The finances in the B1G right now may not be good enough to support the extra scholarships. Plus each team could be in a different situation. Finances would be a likely determinant of what some programs all across the country might be allowed to do regarding funding more than 12 scholarships for a year or two. I do think there will be some controversy if athletic departments out there who have had to lay off employees recently due to budgetary restraints all of a sudden start adding more scholarship players in January 2021 and for the immediate future. |
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Sept 8, 2020 20:14:24 GMT -5
I am guessing there are some moving parts going on here. The finances in the B1G right now may not be good enough to support the extra scholarships. Plus each team could be in a different situation. s. Finances would be a likely determinant of what some programs all across the country might be allowed to do regarding funding more than 12 scholarships for a year or two. I do think there will be some controversy if athletic departments out there who have had to lay off employees recently due to budgetary restraints all of a sudden start adding more scholarship players in January 2021 and for the immediate future. Then again, if there are football players the school wants to keep, that almost HAS to trickle down to olympic sport teams (especially womens teams). |
|
|
|
Post by horns1 on Sept 8, 2020 20:19:25 GMT -5
Finances would be a likely determinant of what some programs all across the country might be allowed to do regarding funding more than 12 scholarships for a year or two. I do think there will be some controversy if athletic departments out there who have had to lay off employees recently due to budgetary restraints all of a sudden start adding more scholarship players in January 2021 and for the immediate future. Then again, if there are football players the school wants to keep, that almost HAS to trickle down to olympic sport teams (especially womens teams). As it pertains to Title IX ? So, if more (male) football players are allowed to stay on scholarship (beyond the 85-man limit per normal year), then that means the proportion of female athletes on scholarships has to increase to stay in compliance? So, even more money spent.
That will really cause some pushback if athletic departments who have slashed jobs the last few months are now increasing the amount they spend on funding increased number of scholarships beyond the previous norm.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildcat403 on Sept 8, 2020 22:41:56 GMT -5
Doesn't everyone of these recent (past several months) 2022 commits doing so based on a verbal offer made many months ago and w/o any recent recruiting communication with the school? A lot has changed since the time a verbal offer was made and when the player made a verbal commitment. How many schools have changed their recruiting and scholarship plans over the last month? Is there any schools that are now considering to pass on the 2022 class based on the new eligibility/scholarship rules. Here is an example - this is just speculation on my part - Kentucky. Kentucky had the #1 or #2 recruiting class for 2020. They may have the #2 recruiting class for 2021. They have 5 highly rated true Freshman this year along with one redshirt Freshman. They have 4 highly rated recruits for 2021 - do they want all 9 of those players with the same graduation year? And they have some very valuable senior players. What if Kentucky is able to afford to increase their scholarships for 2021. Curry, Lilley, Paris, and Skinner all come back for a 2nd senior season. They use the extra scholarships for Beavin, Grome, Lamb, and Williams in 2021 and redshirt all 4 players. They then use their great 2020 class as effectively becoming a 2021 class with a 2024 final year. Their excellent 2021 class effectively becomes their 2022 class and they essentially skip recruiting anyone from the 2022 HS class? I can see some programs looking to back off on 2022 commits if there is a way for them to afford the extra scholarships next year. This crossed my mind as well. Although it’s hard to see Curry and Lilley around an extra year with how highly they’re regarded. To me I think the lack of 2022s for UK is more of the fact of roster management since they have had two strong classes with 4-5 in each class like you said along with the RS Fr. Would still like to see them grab 1-2 strong players this class, but not sure who’s on there radar at this point. |
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Sept 9, 2020 0:29:53 GMT -5
What an interesting recruiting class. I see maybe 5 or 6 impact players left on the board (future improvement notwithstanding) and I still find it SHOCKING that THREE of the top 5 2018 recruiting classes (Penn State, Washington, Oregon) have only one commitment each. Are these programs going to be saved by Covid which allow their massive 2018 class to stay through the 2022 season? If these programs don't have strong 2023 recruiting years, I see a decent fall in on court success, in particular for Penn State. Washington had already relegated itself to a perennial Elite 8/Sweet 16 type program (which is still darn impressive) and who knows where Oregon goes from here, but Penn State simply is not going to be able to keep up in the Big 10 with the way its recruiting. Everything goes in cycles, I guess, and I think the era of Penn State being truly an elite program that one could almost pencil in to a final four is coming to an abrupt end.
I also think that this new decade is prime opportunity for Skinner and Wise to show us that they can break the Big/Pac/Texas stranglehold on elite college volleyball. There is simply way too much talent headed to the top of the SEC for a final four site to not constantly be in Lexington or Gainesville moving forward. Sealy notwithstanding, the LA schools are going to give the Pac-12 that 1-2-3 elite punch along with Stanford that has been missed over the past few years. Nobody is recruiting better than Nebraska right now and I don't see them falling anywhere. Wisconsin and Minnesota also have the right pieces to build a lasting talented core for the next half decade. The next 5-8 years will be really interesting. I'm going to predict that in the next 8 years 1- the SEC will win a national title, 2- Stanford will still hold the crown as having the most titles, and 3- The Big 10 isn't going to dominate sweet 16/elite 8 berths as in the past 8 years.
|
|
|
|
Post by blue-footedbooby on Sept 9, 2020 3:17:55 GMT -5
What an interesting recruiting class. I see maybe 5 or 6 impact players left on the board (future improvement notwithstanding) and I still find it SHOCKING that THREE of the top 5 2018 recruiting classes (Penn State, Washington, Oregon) have only one commitment each. Are these programs going to be saved by Covid which allow their massive 2018 class to stay through the 2022 season? If these programs don't have strong 2023 recruiting years, I see a decent fall in on court success, in particular for Penn State. Washington had already relegated itself to a perennial Elite 8/Sweet 16 type program (which is still darn impressive) and who knows where Oregon goes from here, but Penn State simply is not going to be able to keep up in the Big 10 with the way its recruiting. Everything goes in cycles, I guess, and I think the era of Penn State being truly an elite program that one could almost pencil in to a final four is coming to an abrupt end. I also think that this new decade is prime opportunity for Skinner and Wise to show us that they can break the Big/Pac/Texas stranglehold on elite college volleyball. There is simply way too much talent headed to the top of the SEC for a final four site to not constantly be in Lexington or Gainesville moving forward. Sealy notwithstanding, the LA schools are going to give the Pac-12 that 1-2-3 elite punch along with Stanford that has been missed over the past few years. Nobody is recruiting better than Nebraska right now and I don't see them falling anywhere. Wisconsin and Minnesota also have the right pieces to build a lasting talented core for the next half decade. The next 5-8 years will be really interesting. I'm going to predict that in the next 8 years 1- the SEC will win a national title, 2- Stanford will still hold the crown as having the most titles, and 3- The Big 10 isn't going to dominate sweet 16/elite 8 berths as in the past 8 years. Some have been posting about PSU's demise the last few years now, just too many emerging programs to compete for talent with anymore. For me, Oregon's fall off the radar was apparent early last year with the coach running the program into the ground. UW was the one hard to predict, but being the loyalist I am, I think they'll pull a rabbit out of their hat. |
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Sept 9, 2020 3:58:44 GMT -5
What an interesting recruiting class. I see maybe 5 or 6 impact players left on the board (future improvement notwithstanding) and I still find it SHOCKING that THREE of the top 5 2018 recruiting classes (Penn State, Washington, Oregon) have only one commitment each. Are these programs going to be saved by Covid which allow their massive 2018 class to stay through the 2022 season? If these programs don't have strong 2023 recruiting years, I see a decent fall in on court success, in particular for Penn State. Washington had already relegated itself to a perennial Elite 8/Sweet 16 type program (which is still darn impressive) and who knows where Oregon goes from here, but Penn State simply is not going to be able to keep up in the Big 10 with the way its recruiting. Everything goes in cycles, I guess, and I think the era of Penn State being truly an elite program that one could almost pencil in to a final four is coming to an abrupt end. I also think that this new decade is prime opportunity for Skinner and Wise to show us that they can break the Big/Pac/Texas stranglehold on elite college volleyball. There is simply way too much talent headed to the top of the SEC for a final four site to not constantly be in Lexington or Gainesville moving forward. Sealy notwithstanding, the LA schools are going to give the Pac-12 that 1-2-3 elite punch along with Stanford that has been missed over the past few years. Nobody is recruiting better than Nebraska right now and I don't see them falling anywhere. Wisconsin and Minnesota also have the right pieces to build a lasting talented core for the next half decade. The next 5-8 years will be really interesting. I'm going to predict that in the next 8 years 1- the SEC will win a national title, 2- Stanford will still hold the crown as having the most titles, and 3- The Big 10 isn't going to dominate sweet 16/elite 8 berths as in the past 8 years. Some have been posting about PSU's demise the last few years now, just too many emerging programs to compete for talent with anymore. For me, Oregon's fall off the radar was apparent early last year with the coach running the program into the ground. UW was the one hard to predict, but being the loyalist I am, I think they'll pull a rabbit out of their hat. I think the issue for Washington (and Oregon for that matter) is two fold. First, the amount of top tier California talent has dwindled as more players focus on beach only and demographics changes. California has historically been a nice picking ground to really bolster these teams rosters and get some truly impactful players to come to the Northwest. Secondly, the amount of elite talent in the Northwest has taken a hit between 2018-2022. It's not that the Northwest schools can't keep players home, it's that there haven't been as many Pac-12 level recruits in the last few years. The real test for Cook and Ulmer (though he hasn't had as much time to) was whether or not they'd be able to sustain picking off a handful of elite California kids like they have in the past and get a few national prospects to come when the northwest talent wasn't up to par. The programs were able to do that in 2018, it doesn't look like that will repeat in 2022. Penn State is the big surprise. They have been elite national recruiters for a long time. I have no idea what is happening there. |
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Sept 9, 2020 4:05:54 GMT -5
What an interesting recruiting class. I see maybe 5 or 6 impact players left on the board (future improvement notwithstanding) and I still find it SHOCKING that THREE of the top 5 2018 recruiting classes (Penn State, Washington, Oregon) have only one commitment each. Are these programs going to be saved by Covid which allow their massive 2018 class to stay through the 2022 season? If these programs don't have strong 2023 recruiting years, I see a decent fall in on court success, in particular for Penn State. Washington had already relegated itself to a perennial Elite 8/Sweet 16 type program (which is still darn impressive) and who knows where Oregon goes from here, but Penn State simply is not going to be able to keep up in the Big 10 with the way its recruiting. Everything goes in cycles, I guess, and I think the era of Penn State being truly an elite program that one could almost pencil in to a final four is coming to an abrupt end. I also think that this new decade is prime opportunity for Skinner and Wise to show us that they can break the Big/Pac/Texas stranglehold on elite college volleyball. There is simply way too much talent headed to the top of the SEC for a final four site to not constantly be in Lexington or Gainesville moving forward. Sealy notwithstanding, the LA schools are going to give the Pac-12 that 1-2-3 elite punch along with Stanford that has been missed over the past few years. Nobody is recruiting better than Nebraska right now and I don't see them falling anywhere. Wisconsin and Minnesota also have the right pieces to build a lasting talented core for the next half decade. The next 5-8 years will be really interesting. I'm going to predict that in the next 8 years 1- the SEC will win a national title, 2- Stanford will still hold the crown as having the most titles, and 3- The Big 10 isn't going to dominate sweet 16/elite 8 berths as in the past 8 years. I think your predictions are really solid and I think all of them have a realistic chance of coming to pass. But I found your hypothesis that, based on their 2018 recruiting class rankings, you'd expect PSU, Washington and Oregon to be doing 'better' in the 2022 recruiting process confusing. Now that we (and the 2022 classes) have had 2 years to evaluate those classes, have they really achieved what some people expected of them? I understand that PV etc thought PSU, Washington and Oregon all had top 5 recruiting classes, but did they really? I thought I'd take a look... PSU had a big class of 8 with a host of top senior aces including Kaitlin Hord, Serena Gray, Gabby Blossom, Jonni Parker, Jenna Hampton and Allyson Cathey. Hord, Gray and Blossom have all been 'as advertised'. Parker has a great arm but isn't a strong blocker and PSU ended up passing 2 in 2019 partly because Parker couldn't keep up in serve receive (37% good pass percentage on the season). That two person SR featured another 2018 senior ace; Jenna Hampton. Hampton played OK in 2018 but struggled in 2019 falling to a 47% good pass percentage on the year, significantly behind Keeton Holcomb and Kendall White, limiting PSU's passing as a group. Having lost White and Holcomb, Rose was looking for a new libero in the portal back in the spring and I wouldn't be shocked if he picked incoming freshman Maddy Bilinovic over Hampton as libero as early as next year. Cathey, Amanda Phegley and Brooklyn Hill are all off the roster. Washington's 2018 class produced a very good player in Ella May Powell who, like the PSU setter, has 'blossomed' (I'm sorry) into one of the top players at her position. After EMP, Claire Hoffman has been the next most valuable. Hoffman was limited by injury in 2019 and also passed well for an outside last season (55%) but has a career hitting efficiency of .189. After those two, the rest have been disappointing; Dani Cole has 10 career kills (injuries and inconsistent play look likely to limit her career), Crenshaw played more than she would have, I think, if Hoffman had been healthy but also struggled hitting (.179) however unlike Hoffman, also couldn't pass; 46% good pass. Marin Grote (MB) has played sparingly through her first two seasons (37 kills in 2018 and 20 in 2019) and seems likely to be backup to Summers and Sanders in 2020/21. So that's quality player, one other starter, and the rest have been back ups. Oregon's 2018 unit was comprised of 5 players; Kylie Robinson, Karson Bacon, Brooke Nuneviller, Chandler Duff and Camryn Tastad. Of the 5, Nuneviller has been consistently strong. First as a libero in her freshman campaign, then as an outside last year. She'll remain at OH in 2020 and, with a bit more pop in her arm could become one of the better OH2s in the Pac. Robinson redshirted her freshman year and had an up and down 2019 as the Ducks finished 9-20. Bacon also redshirted 2018 and although she played last year, she has yet to show the kind of athleticism that led to her being the #11 senior ace. Neither Tastad or Duff made it to year 2 in Eugene. And what success have these classes achieved? Precisely 0 final fours. 0 conference championships and Oregon didn't even make the tournament in 2019. I'm not sure I'd even say any of these programs are top three in their conference heading into 2020 (although I think PSU and Washington both have a good claim to be fourth in the B1G and Pac respectively). My point is that ranking recruits and, by extension, recruiting classes is a crapshoot and the moment those classes get to their schools, you might as well burn the rankings. They mean nothing. Brooklyn Schirmer was the #12 senior ace in 2018. Lauren Mathews was the #100. If I were advising any 2022s (and, you never know, I might be...  ) I could name about 100 factors that would be more meaningful when choosing a college than the ranking of a previous recruiting class. Hindsight is always 20/20, but one cannot deny that these 3 programs had a number of scholarships dolled out in 2018 which would lead one to think that they would be bringing in a larger class for 2022 to replace them. I wasn't really focusing on their prep VB ranking so much as I was focusing on the fact that in a normal recruiting cycle there was going to be a big chunk of the roster missing and these programs would need to fill those slots. Presumably, given the high status in collegiate volleyball for these programs (In particular Penn State), they'd be filling these scholarships with new recruits who are also highly rated (regardless of what they do or do not end up doing in college). I don't think that's an unreasonable position to have? larger classes kind of go in cycles. Penn State 2010- had 5+ schollie players coming in, 2014- had 5+ schollie players coming in, 2018- had 5+ schollie players coming in....2022 should be a pretty large class Washington 2014- had 4 schollie players coming in, had 5 schollie players coming in....2022 should be a pretty large class |
|
) I could name about 100 factors that would be more meaningful when choosing a college than the ranking of a previous recruiting class.