|
|
Post by savannahbadger on Oct 7, 2022 17:52:52 GMT -5
Has anyone tried to stream Wisconsin volleyball from BTM plus to your TV? The Roku seems like this should be possible, but I have never had any success in doing it. I usually watch on my PC. Any advice? BTN is in the Fox Sports app. There might be an app for BTN+, but I’m not sure about that. We have a TV with Roku built into it, but don’t use it much. Main TV has an Apple TV connected to it. |
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Oct 7, 2022 18:00:52 GMT -5
Has anyone tried to stream Wisconsin volleyball from BTM plus to your TV? The Roku seems like this should be possible, but I have never had any success in doing it. I usually watch on my PC. Any advice? I have no problem, but I use Chromecast, use the BTN app, and watch BTN through Hulu There are some apps/providers for which I have a hard time casting, and sometimes casting doesn't work from either my phone or my laptop. |
|
|
|
Post by buckypete on Oct 7, 2022 22:37:40 GMT -5
Has anyone tried to stream Wisconsin volleyball from BTM plus to your TV? The Roku seems like this should be possible, but I have never had any success in doing it. I usually watch on my PC. Any advice? I chromecast it sometimes but it can be hit and miss to the point that I usually just plug my laptop into my TV with an HDMI cord and use it like a second monitor. |
|
|
|
Post by ndodge on Oct 8, 2022 14:30:24 GMT -5
I often connect hdmi from iphone to a larger monitor, using a lightning to hdmi adapter. I don't have high speed internet at home (my phone for personal and a work hotspot has been sufficient so I cheap out on that). Except for services (like espn, nba) which block the phone to monitor using a cord for some stupid reason. BTN actually used to block it and I got in a big spat with them asking them why they cared if I connected a phone to a monitor. Then, the year after, suddenly it worked. I once got AppleTV to work without internet but that confused me and since BTN now works with the direct cord method I don't care that much to figure it out any more. The cord method works nicely in hotels, either phone or laptop to tv, so I always bring an hdmi cord with me on travels.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wiswell on Oct 8, 2022 15:50:31 GMT -5
Anna Smrek was featured on At the Net on BTN yesterday.
|
|
|
|
Post by badgerguru on Oct 8, 2022 19:19:11 GMT -5
That’s a nice win over Purdue. What players stuck out to everybody, for me it was GG & her defense.
|
|
|
|
Post by rainbowbadger on Oct 8, 2022 19:26:04 GMT -5
Orzoł x 1000
|
|
|
|
Post by Wiswell on Oct 8, 2022 19:30:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by robtearle on Oct 8, 2022 21:36:12 GMT -5
Purdue match, points by server by set:
Izzy on the court: 9-15, 13-5, 11-10, 11-14; total 44-44
MJ on the court: 7-10, 12-14, 14-8, 19-14; total 52-46
-----------
Points scored during the serve of server:
Izzy: 4 points on 9 trips to the line
Orzol: 7 point on 9 trips
GG: 12 points on 8 trips
MJ: 13 points on 9 trips
Franklin: 1 point on 7 trips
Liz G: 4 points on 6 trips
CC: 0 points on 3 trips
AnnaMac: 0 points on 1 trip
Boyer: 1 point on 1 trip
-----------
Sideout percents by server for the year (taking out High Point, Campbell, Rhode Island; lower number the better)
Izzy: 0.525
Orzol: 0.638
GG: 0.540
MJ: 0.518
Franklin: 0.634
Liz G: 0.563
CC: 0.600
Demps: 0.235
AnnaMac: 1.000
Boyer: 0.500
|
|
|
|
Post by tablealgebra on Oct 8, 2022 22:03:26 GMT -5
Orzol was the one who stood out. Otherwise performances were pretty much on the higher end of what you'd expect. |
|
|
|
Post by rainbowbadger on Oct 9, 2022 7:18:51 GMT -5
Purdue match, points by server by set: Izzy on the court: 9-15, 13-5, 11-10, 11-14; total 44-44 MJ on the court: 7-10, 12-14, 14-8, 19-14; total 52-46 ----------- Points scored during the serve of server: Izzy: 4 points on 9 trips to the line Orzol: 7 point on 9 trips GG: 12 points on 8 trips MJ: 13 points on 9 trips Franklin: 1 point on 7 trips Liz G: 4 points on 6 trips CC: 0 points on 3 trips AnnaMac: 0 points on 1 trip Boyer: 1 point on 1 trip ----------- Sideout percents by server for the year (taking out High Point, Campbell, Rhode Island; lower number the better) Izzy: 0.525 Orzol: 0.638 GG: 0.540 MJ: 0.518 Franklin: 0.634 Liz G: 0.563 CC: 0.600 Demps: 0.235 AnnaMac: 1.000 Boyer: 0.500 I really appreciate these stats after every match. Thank you! |
|
|
|
Post by robtearle on Oct 9, 2022 11:50:54 GMT -5
Purdue match, points by server by set: Izzy on the court: 9-15, 13-5, 11-10, 11-14; total 44-44 MJ on the court: 7-10, 12-14, 14-8, 19-14; total 52-46 ----------- Points scored during the serve of server: Izzy: 4 points on 9 trips to the line Orzol: 7 point on 9 trips GG: 12 points on 8 trips MJ: 13 points on 9 trips Franklin: 1 point on 7 trips Liz G: 4 points on 6 trips CC: 0 points on 3 trips AnnaMac: 0 points on 1 trip Boyer: 1 point on 1 trip ----------- Sideout percents by server for the year (taking out High Point, Campbell, Rhode Island; lower number the better) Izzy: 0.525 Orzol: 0.638 GG: 0.540 MJ: 0.518 Franklin: 0.634 Liz G: 0.563 CC: 0.600 Demps: 0.235 AnnaMac: 1.000 Boyer: 0.500 I really appreciate these stats after every match. Thank you! Glad to do it. Although I started the points by setter when we were doubting they'd stick with the 6-2, and it now is pretty clear we're going the whole season with it. Still, interesting to know, IMO. Two things about the serving stats: - I realized that I'm saying it a bit wrong: GG had 9 trips to the line, but only 8 of them ended with her 'surrendering' the serve by being sided-out. The 4th set she served the ace to end the match. Saying it the way I am was meant to show/imply the sideout percent for the match. I'll think of some way to say it better going forward? (And I know there have been other such instances, and I'm sure I've been consistent in saying it that 'wrong' way. Gregorski serving the final six points vs Illinois, eg.) - This far into the B1G schedule, should I switch over to server percents in B1G matches, or stay with 'quality opponents'? Or post both? The spreadsheet is already set up to making doing either no 'additional' work. |
|
|
|
Post by badgerguru on Oct 9, 2022 14:09:45 GMT -5
I really appreciate these stats after every match. Thank you! Glad to do it. Although I started the points by setter when we were doubting they'd stick with the 6-2, and it now is pretty clear we're going the whole season with it. Still, interesting to know, IMO. Two things about the serving stats: - I realized that I'm saying it a bit wrong: GG had 9 trips to the line, but only 8 of them ended with her 'surrendering' the serve by being sided-out. The 4th set she served the ace to end the match. Saying it the way I am was meant to show/imply the sideout percent for the match. I'll think of some way to say it better going forward? (And I know there have been other such instances, and I'm sure I've been consistent in saying it that 'wrong' way. Gregorski serving the final six points vs Illinois, eg.) - This far into the B1G schedule, should I switch over to server percents in B1G matches, or stay with 'quality opponents'? Or post both? The spreadsheet is already set up to making doing either no 'additional' work. I think it would be good if you were to switch it to only B1G matches, I feel like we are starting to hit our groove now with the 6-2 & some of our non-con schedule we obviously were not playing well |
|
|
|
Post by tablealgebra on Oct 9, 2022 19:42:27 GMT -5
After 24 hours to process I've concluded that the Purdue match was a strong proof-of-concept for this team. Sheffield said at some point that the 6-2 was less about siding out and more about having a consistently strong block and strong transition game. Which requires strong serving to keep the opponents from just trivially siding out on their first swing. Against Purdue, we:
- served strong, consistently, and to my eyes according to the game plan (which seemed to be deep serves, especially at receivers shoulders and targeting Brown and Ellis.
- by doing so, and by giving very few free balls, kept Purdue out of system, which in conjunction with a big block neutralized their middles and opposite.
- managed fairly good floor defense and good passing, which is a weakness of the 6-2 due to no DS.
Since that means it looks like the 6-2 is here to stay, I have to wonder if Bramschrieber is going to be given a shot to unseat GG at libero (where GG has been good for a freshman but not really all-conference team quality) and if anyone will be put in as a DS for Franklin (whose back-row hitting has been very good and thus may not warrant a DS). I don't know if that will happen though because of the problem with the sub count, which I think looks like this so far:
Rotation 4: Hammill for Ashburn
Ro 4: Smrek for Robinson
Ro 6 (serve): Gregorski for CC
Ro 6 (receive): CC for Gregorski (who is immediately replaced by GG as libero)
2nd trip:
Ro 1: Ashburn for Hammill
Ro 1: Robinson for Smrek
Ro 4: Hammill for Ashburn
Ro 4: Smrek for Robinson
3rd trip:
Ro 1: Ashburn for Hammill
Ro 1: Robinson for Smrek
Ro 4: Hammill for Ashburn
Ro 4: Smrek for Robinson
4th trip:
Ro 1: Ashburn for Hammill
Ro 4: Demps for Smrek
You can get around three times with this sub pattern (only involving one serving sub) which is more than you need in most sets, especially if we're trying to create serving runs. If you have a second serving sub, you lose the Ashburn for Hammill sub the fourth time around but still can put Demps in with sub #15. If you use a DS for Franklin, now you no longer can run a 6-2 in your third rotation.
|
|
|
|
Post by buckyupbuttercup on Oct 9, 2022 20:26:53 GMT -5
Interesting thoughts. There are certainly various options to choose.
I'm not sure how effective Shanel's serve is, but I think I'd initially like to see her serve for franklin, improve the defense and serve receive, effectively giving franklin a break from the backrow on a couple of the 'trips'.
I'd give up the Liz for Crawford servicing sub willingly since it doesn't move the needle much at the cost of two subs. The numbers also say you can argue that Franklin should be the one to be subbed out for serving anyway. She can get on a roll, but too many end up in the net. I also don't worry about the demps for Smrek sub at the end as much as others. Demps would theoretically give you better defense and another hitting option across the back. However, either one would be hidden in serve receive anyway and there would already be a backrow hitting option with franklin/orzol.
Regarding Shanel vs GG, i guess it is a matter of how much better Shanel is in serve receive and how well does she take the 2nd ball(I assume it won't be as good as GG).
|
|
