|
|
Post by aardvark on Dec 15, 2021 15:44:03 GMT -5
a second day of AA posts to read ... ok, let me get some more coffee ... lol You should be thankful. The AVCA awards are a (un?)pleasant distraction from having to wait one more day for the volleyball action to commence. |
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Dec 15, 2021 15:46:43 GMT -5
So true. Your first and greatest ability is your availability. Two hypotheticals, for you or anyone else that wants to play along. What if Stivrins was good to go 2 weeks earlier? What if Cook convinced her to give it an extra two weeks of rest because he wanted to make sure that she would be able to play through the entire postseason without any set-backs. It's possible she was available, but was told to wait it out because the team didn't need her in those matches? Does that affect the discussion regarding availability? What if Cook had started her in every set the first weekend of play, but then subbed her out after the first point? Technically she'd be eligible then. He easily could have done that if he wanted to make sure she was eligible for these awards. Maybe he wasn't willing to do that because he didn't want to send the message that individual awards are important enough to waste a sub, but another coach might be. I suppose the fact that I can't come up with any instance of this actually happening means it's not much of a concern. I hope that a college coach is not pushing young athletes to risk their health. Especially not for eligibility for some post-season award. And actually, we have seen cases where injured players come in just to serve, or just to play back row, or whatever. Of course, that hurts their per-set averages, so it's not necessarily beneficial in terms of getting awards. I assume that coaches (and players) do such things because it is part of the rehab process, and because they feel like the contributions the player can safely make are beneficial to the player and the team. |
|
|
|
Post by eazy on Dec 15, 2021 15:48:29 GMT -5
If the awards were solely based on stats, that would be a decent argument. As we see today, that is not the case. No, because if she started say 8 sets in beginning of season and was subbed out after 1st point her stats would then reflect 8 more sets played with really no stats so all her per set stats would go down to levels below AA consideration levels probably. It's unfortunate because she is the key to Nebraska's season shifting from good/very good to great once she entered the line up as an everyday player. She may not have been the stat leader, but once she was on the court she gave everyone else on the team the confidence that they now could compete for titles whether B1G or NCAA. Unless they started her in a few sets against Colgate, Rutgers, Iowa, etc. Let her get 2-3 kills in the first 5-10 points and then take her out. |
|
|
|
Post by eazy on Dec 15, 2021 15:50:15 GMT -5
Two hypotheticals, for you or anyone else that wants to play along. What if Stivrins was good to go 2 weeks earlier? What if Cook convinced her to give it an extra two weeks of rest because he wanted to make sure that she would be able to play through the entire postseason without any set-backs. It's possible she was available, but was told to wait it out because the team didn't need her in those matches? Does that affect the discussion regarding availability? What if Cook had started her in every set the first weekend of play, but then subbed her out after the first point? Technically she'd be eligible then. He easily could have done that if he wanted to make sure she was eligible for these awards. Maybe he wasn't willing to do that because he didn't want to send the message that individual awards are important enough to waste a sub, but another coach might be. I suppose the fact that I can't come up with any instance of this actually happening means it's not much of a concern. I hope that a college coach is not pushing young athletes to risk their health. Especially not for eligibility for some post-season award. And actually, we have seen cases where injured players come in just to serve, or just to play back row, or whatever. Of course, that hurts their per-set averages, so it's not necessarily beneficial in terms of getting awards. I assume that coaches (and players) do such things because it is part of the rehab process, and because they feel like the contributions the player can safely make are beneficial to the player and the team. I suppose using the first weekend of play as an example was silly. The the week before she fully came back, they could have tested it out for a few points. Let her start a few sets, get a few kills, and then take her out. It's not like she went from 0% ready to play to 100% between the last match she sat and the first one she played. |
|
|
|
Post by vbprisoner on Dec 15, 2021 15:56:31 GMT -5
No, because if she started say 8 sets in beginning of season and was subbed out after 1st point her stats would then reflect 8 more sets played with really no stats so all her per set stats would go down to levels below AA consideration levels probably. It's unfortunate because she is the key to Nebraska's season shifting from good/very good to great once she entered the line up as an everyday player. She may not have been the stat leader, but once she was on the court she gave everyone else on the team the confidence that they now could compete for titles whether B1G or NCAA. Unless they started her in a few sets against Colgate, Rutgers, Iowa, etc. Let her get 2-3 kills in the first 5-10 points and then take her out. That would defeat the whole purpose of not playing to insure full recovery... that's like 2/5 of each set and enough to get reinjured. I know this is all hypothetical, and Cook is not the type of coach to make those type of decisions. |
|
|
|
Post by jwvolley on Dec 15, 2021 16:07:23 GMT -5
Congrats to all these deserving athletes  |
|
|
|
Post by photos1 on Dec 15, 2021 16:22:24 GMT -5
Others that were robbed (not even HM): Gneiting, Tillman, Murr, Blossom, Hampton, Frohling, Miner, Pukis, Igiede these are some horrible omissions Keep up the humor, you have everyone in the media room on the floor laughing or just rolling their eyes . . . all it took was patience for you to expose yourself. . .you don’t appear capable of keeping your bias and dislike out of any evaluation. . . In the future, let the adults in the room select these teams. . . Like they did today. 😏 Being an AA means the player is not only special but they had a AA season. . . When you are setting for the 6th place team in your conference, you did not have an AA season. On Saturday night in the fourth set when Texas had fought back within a point of Nebraska and Gregory was mind numbingly loud, Akana shanked a serve return. . . there was only one L in the country who could have taken that shank and bump set the ball over her shoulder 30 feet to allow Batenhorst to kill the ball. . .and that was Rodriquez. . . and during the past 14 weeks she has done this routinely-she is a great passer, a great digger, but what she seems to do best is have great second touches. When it mattered most Lexi Rodriquez was the best L in the country this year. . . and AVCA agrees. 👀 |
|
|
|
Post by naujack85 on Dec 15, 2021 16:27:22 GMT -5
I watched most of Nebraska's games this year. What impressed me the most about Roddy's play was how many of her digs were fantastic and came at critical times. She also gave good sets when Hames had first dig. Which was often. A lot of teams hit at Nicklin so she could not set middles. Statistics do not tell the whole story. You get the same stat from passing a free ball as you do for a hard driven ball. You get the same stat from PASSING a free ball compared to a hard driven ball eh? As in, no stat at all since you pass a serve and not a mid-rally swing 🤨 Also, like many others have stated, Lexi didn't deserve first team at all. She only got it cause Nebraska made the final four. |
|
|
|
Post by gogophers on Dec 15, 2021 16:31:32 GMT -5
As usually the case, players highly ranked by prepvb filled a good many, though not all, of the first and second team. For the 12 US players on the first team, half were ranked in the top 10 (Butler, Hilley, Samedy, Rettke, Rodriquez, and May) and, if I recall correctly, Eggleston was a special case (unranked because she skipped her senior year or something like that, but was projected to be in the top 3, in which case it would have been 7 first teamers from the top 10 recruits. The notable overachievers (in terms of prepvolleyball rankings) were Dilfer (not in the top 100 at all) and Stevenson (82). Lund, at 55, was also outside the top 50.
Dilfer and Caffey (2nd team) are transfers to top teams, who weren't in the running for such honors until they transferred--perhaps bolstering the case that the awards go to the best players on the best teams, and not necessarily the best players, period.
As usual, the second team rankings, while good, weren't as good as the first team's. There were 3 top 10ers (Baird, Kipp, and Hord) and six more were ranked between 18 and 27 (Dreschel, Grote, Nuneviller, Rader, Monserez, Grome). Newton was just outside the top 50; Member-Lecator, just inside. Caffey was 71. Barnes was unranked, as far as I can tell, but that's not surprising for someone recruited as a DS.
|
|
|
|
Post by cbrown1709 on Dec 15, 2021 16:32:46 GMT -5
So her team made the final four, that means she should make a team? With stats like that? Yes. Her stats are lower in every category except sa.. |
|
|
|
Post by donut on Dec 15, 2021 16:36:55 GMT -5
Akana shanked a serve return. . . there was only one L in the country who could have taken that shank and bump set the ball over her shoulder 30 feet to allow Batenhorst to kill the ball. . .and that was Rodriquez. . . ok cindra you were right |
|
|
|
Post by Cubicle No More ... on Dec 15, 2021 16:47:41 GMT -5
Almost as ridiculous as measuring worth by internet likes… I almost "liked" this, but I didn't think anybody would get the joke. fwiw, i did "like" your post/reply, even though i did get the joke ... lol |
|
|
|
Post by vbjustice on Dec 15, 2021 17:00:42 GMT -5
Skylar fields was robbed. Bye.
|
|
|
|
Post by hammer on Dec 15, 2021 17:09:00 GMT -5
I think it’s a lot of respect for the completeness of her game. I’m happy people recognize that. Also most important player on her team that’s in FF She hit: <100: Ariz St, Utah, Louisville, Maryland, Indiana, Texas 100-200 Colgate, K-State, Creighton, Iowa, Purdue, Wisc, Minn, Penn St, Wisc, Fl St 200-300 Georgia, Northwesten, Mich St, Penn St, Rutgers, Iowa, Illinois, Purdue, Campbell, Illinois >300 Omaha, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Ohio St Don’t think she played against Stanford, can’t remember if injury or the freshman playing (which would be another knock) I get her all round game and value to the team, but with that hitting to make 3rd team AA I hope she’s driving the bus and washing the jerseys too. Maybe she will come out and hit 400 in a win over Pitt, who knows. Kubick was only used as serving sub against Stanford. Batenhorst and Krause were used as LS hitters in that match respectively hitting .098 and .088. If Kubick started, Hambly likely would have used Kipp across the net from her. |
|
|
|
Post by vballfan17 on Dec 15, 2021 17:15:31 GMT -5
Are people intentionally spelling Kubik's name wrong? I've seen Kubic and now Kubick... lol
|
|
%20ii%201967-2011-Seal.jpg)