On match threads people keep comparing Texas to the other teams player by player and coming out a wash. Is that wishful thinking or is Texas really not as much of a super team as people like to say?
Well, I will say I don’t think it matters that much if the team as a whole is better. But here are some of the flaws I see when people do this.
1) too much emphasis put on Eggleston and Skinner being effective defensive players in the back row.
I’m not saying it’s unimportant. I am saying it’s less important because Texas only runs one 6 rotation hitter, plus half a rotation for the serve from the other player. Because of Fleck’s ridiculous range, and very good floor defense from Halter and Akana, the 6 rotation player is simply not asked to do as much at Texas as they are on other teams.
I remember watching Rubin for Stanford against USD and how she was the sole defender in middle back and she’d grab dig after dig. That’s not something Texas would ever do with Eggleston or Skinner. Not saying they can’t be targeted, but regardless, they’re not going to play a prominent role for the most part.
As pin attackers they’re absurd to have as a 1-2 punch. Literally absurd. The only thing is Texas has now had an absurd 1-2 punch at left pin (and middle blocker) for what seems like ages now. There’s simply not an equal out there. If Skinner was the featured attacker somewhere else she would be a 1st team AA as well, just like Fields was at USC this year (congrats Fields! I knew it would happen!).
They get discounted in these comparisons, but when the actual match is played like and behold, the Texas left pins dominate their counterparts statistically. Because of course they do.
2) SKT is undervalued. It’s the curse of being the Texas setter, but IMO it’s been particularly egregious with SKT. Now, she has gone up against 3 setters in a row who were undoubtedly better than her in Anchante, Podraza, and Blossom. That said, all three of those setters were out of system WAAAAY more than SKT. In system SKT is better than any server in the country is out of system, and that’s the real comparison these matches have been providing.
Not to mention we all predicted Blossom would be a liability on the front row more so than SKT, and sure enough she was. Edwards was taking advantage of SKT’s block, but not nearly as much as Skinner and Eggleston (after Elliott switched the rotation slightly) did against Blossom. Texas went after her time and time again, and she was basically helpless when it was a good set to the outside.
Lazaro is not as good as SKT in my opinion. She was an amazing pick up by the Cardinals out of USC, but there’s a reason she lost the setter battle to Tuaniga. She has some great weapons that she doesn’t utilize as effectively as setters like Anchante or Blossom - or SKT for that matter. If Texas gets Lazaro out of system the way I think they will, Louisville is going to have issues.
3) Molly Phillips is underappreciated. Phillips is never going to be Kendall Kipp, or Grace Frohling, or good Londot. But that’s not her role. If we wanted that kind of production out of the right side they would have kept Skinner there and play Parra as the 2nd left pin. She provides a big block against the opponent’s best attacker. Even when it doesn’t show in the stat sheet in terms of blocks she’s constantly getting touches and forcing errors or soft tips. Because of the attack from the pins and middles, she’s frequently getting clean looks. Because Texas is in system so much it allows SKT to back set Phillips effectively. She may not be as talented as some other right pins, but within UT’s system she’s awesome at the role she plays.
4) the middle blockers are rated based on their stats over the whole year.
For those of us who have watched, we know Texas wasn’t good at blocking for nearly half of the season. We all remember being last in the Bog 12 in blocks. But we’re all aware in ways outsiders aren’t at how much the block has picked up. And even though the team blocked at about a 2.8 blocks/set in the second half of the season - which is phenomenal- they’ve actually picked it up even more since the start of tournament play. This is a very formidable blocking team now, but it’s being discounted because if the paucity of blocks at the beginning of the year.
Offensively teams are scouting O’Neal a bit better in the tournament, but even with that they’re having to account for her. So her numbers aren’t the true reflection of her contributions. Caffey hasn’t been as productive as I’d hoped, but Bergmark has been coming in early and making a big difference.
The fact is players like Blackwell and PK Kong are legitimately elite. Those teams don’t make it where they do without an elite middle blocker. So calling those comparisons a wash is less a slight to O’Neal as much as it is a recognition of those players’ excellence.
5) outside of Fleck, Halter and Akana’s contributions are underrated.
Fleck IMO is in many ways the most important player on the team. I won’t get into it here, because it’s not much of a hot take, and her contributions are constantly recognized.
That said, Akana is always given short shrift becsusecif her admittedly abominable serve receive - which we knew about from her timecat Nebraska. Because if it, however, she’s not given enough credit for her floor defense, particularly her tip/roll shot coverage, which is critical given UT’s formidable block. Halter, too, is regularly dismissed as a DS sub, when we all know what a difference she makes in every match in all kinds of ways, whether it’s passing dimes or making miraculous one handed stabs or throwing up moon ball bumpsets to Eggleston who then terminates them.
Texas has had a constant and real advantage in the DS department that hasn’t been given enough weight.
6) serving
Texas gets credit for being a tough serving team, but it doesn’t really show up in these comparisons at all.
Take Louisville for example, which best Pitt in large part from their serving. But the truth is only Debeer and Scott have intimidating serves, and to a lesser extent Jones. Chaussee’s serve isn’t anything to get frightened about, for example. Compare that to Texas, who literally puts intense service pressure on an opponent during all 6 rotations, and even has one of the scariest servers in the NCAA in their back pocket if they ever want to roll her out there.
This has been Texas’ key to their wins. No one in the tournament has been able to solve UT’s serving for anything more than one set. If the other team is constantly playing out of system, they’re going to lose. Maybe Louisville can go on the same kind of runs against Texas that they did versus Pitt. If they do, they’re much more likely to win. My bet is that Texas is in system way more than Pitt ever was, with much better setting and better weapons, they end up siding out more than Pitt did, and then they nab a service pint here, two service points there, just like they did versus USD until the boa constrictor tightens around Louisville and they get to 25.
That’s my view on it, anyway.
%20ii%201967-2011-Seal.jpg)
