|
|
Post by ted_heise on Dec 9, 2022 16:42:46 GMT -5
Do you think Batenhorst enters the portal? It seems like she's been in Cook's doghouse from time to time. It's hard to say. Not sure what you mean by doghouse though, if anything he's had more faith in her than the fanbase has. She's very frustrating because she moves well for someone her height but her offense is limited by some bad technical habits of hers and a tendency to be passive. I think she actually looked better playing 6 rotations though, she seemed looser. Idk who will leave if anyone. I think it's probably in Orr's best interest and personally not sure Hayden could possibly feel like she has a real shot anytime soon. This is a good take, jwvolley. |
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 24,333 
|
Post by trojansc on Dec 9, 2022 16:48:17 GMT -5
It’s one thing to use your last two subs when you’re in a 6-2. But to end up with a middle out, for a serving specialist? I don’t know what the analytics would say, but at this level, to end up with essentially no middle, one hitter, and a setter who never plays front row seems too much of a risk. I guess you must consider all things. If your serving specialist is one of the tops in the country and your MB is really bad, I might understand. I have no problem with it. The wrong thing to do would be to conserve a sub in case you go to 30. Sort of the definition of planning to fail. Also, that sub had zero to do with going down 5-14 in the 5th. Hold that down just to 5-11 and it is a whole different outcome. The wrong thing to do is to keep your middle in the game (conserving a sub)? I’m a little confused by that. The only purpose of that sub is to win a point on serve (she doesn’t even stay in to receive, she only came back when Hord rotated out) If the sub was a DS who actually was on serve receive — that’s different. A serving specialist is the least valuable in the long run in terms of subs. |
|
|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Dec 9, 2022 17:53:57 GMT -5
I have no problem with it. The wrong thing to do would be to conserve a sub in case you go to 30. Sort of the definition of planning to fail. Also, that sub had zero to do with going down 5-14 in the 5th. Hold that down just to 5-11 and it is a whole different outcome. The wrong thing to do is to keep your middle in the game (conserving a sub)? I’m a little confused by that. The only purpose of that sub is to win a point on serve (she doesn’t even stay in to receive, she only came back when Hord rotated out) If the sub was a DS who actually was on serve receive — that’s different. A serving specialist is the least valuable in the long run in terms of subs. What is the point of keeping in a weak serving MB at that point? Oregon is a strong passing team and is most likely to convert a cream puff in system. Cook chose to increase the chance of winning now, and the chance of that position rotating back to the front row was fairly small at that point. I'm not saying that you would be wrong if you DIDN'T put in a serving sub, just that Cook felt it was worth the risk at the time. It was a calculated risk that didn't work. |
|
|
|
Post by stanfordvb on Dec 9, 2022 18:07:34 GMT -5
booo nebraska lost end this thread
|
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Dec 9, 2022 18:13:42 GMT -5
booo nebraska lost end this thread Not so fast. We still haven't heard what Mr Ed's fate will be. Things might get sticky. |
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 24,333
|
Post by trojansc on Dec 9, 2022 18:19:10 GMT -5
The wrong thing to do is to keep your middle in the game (conserving a sub)? I’m a little confused by that. The only purpose of that sub is to win a point on serve (she doesn’t even stay in to receive, she only came back when Hord rotated out) If the sub was a DS who actually was on serve receive — that’s different. A serving specialist is the least valuable in the long run in terms of subs. What is the point of keeping in a weak serving MB at that point? Oregon is a strong passing team and is most likely to convert a cream puff in system. Cook chose to increase the chance of winning now, and the chance of that position rotating back to the front row was fairly small at that point. I'm not saying that you would be wrong if you DIDN'T put in a serving sub, just that Cook felt it was worth the risk at the time. It was a calculated risk that didn't work. When you said it's wrong to to conserve a sub - it sounded like you meant that it was wrong to not sub in that instance. I also disagree it's a creampuff serve, it's inconsistent, but there's definitely worse serves out there. He also replaced Allick with a player who has 3 aces on the entire season (yes, this doesn't tell the whole story, but, it just makes me more skeptical if it's really worth it). |
|
|
|
Post by timduckforlife on Dec 9, 2022 18:36:53 GMT -5
Lol 1. She only had 5 swings on D balls.As for passing, Oregon slightly outpassed NE, mostly because Batenhorst got worked a bit. Nebraska
Rodriguez- 2.35 / 58.8 GP% Kubik- 2.17 / 51.3 GP% Batenhorst- 2.06 / 41.2 GP% Oregon
Murphy - 2.31 / 43.9 GP% Nuneviller- 2.18 / 44.4 GP% McClellan- 2.19/ 51.9 GP% rip you beat me by two minutes I'm leaving mine up I worked too hard for that lmao Side question: Does VM allow for a breakdown of passing % by set? It honestly seemed like Neb passed better in set 4 and was in system a lot more than previous sets. |
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Dec 9, 2022 18:43:23 GMT -5
it was a pitiful showing by the Husker fans What about the Louisville fans? It didn't look like very many of them showed up for the Nebraska v. Oregon match. I know, work, 10:00 am start time, etc. Still, I would have expected a larger turnout for the first match, and think for the most part ay2013 is pointing his finger in the wrong direction. The difference is that I never hear Louisville posters/program brag about their amazing fans who would apparently move mountains to watch quality volleyball, and how the world needs to revolve around Husker volleyball because of the large amounts of money the fans spend for volleyball. Like pretty much every other program, if their team isn't actually playing and playing close to home, these hardcore Nebraska fans aren't showing up. Not sure why it's so wrong to admit that? Wisconsin and Texas were the same way. The entire top half of Gregory gym was empty for Ohio State and Minnesota (two top 10 programs) and the Wisconsin arena you could hear the echos from the players on the court on TV. |
|
|
|
Post by section N on Dec 9, 2022 18:47:06 GMT -5
booo nebraska lost end this thread Not so fast. We still haven't heard what Mr Ed's fate will be. Things might get sticky. Do mean Bud? |
|
|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Dec 9, 2022 19:20:08 GMT -5
What is the point of keeping in a weak serving MB at that point? Oregon is a strong passing team and is most likely to convert a cream puff in system. Cook chose to increase the chance of winning now, and the chance of that position rotating back to the front row was fairly small at that point. I'm not saying that you would be wrong if you DIDN'T put in a serving sub, just that Cook felt it was worth the risk at the time. It was a calculated risk that didn't work. When you said it's wrong to to conserve a sub - it sounded like you meant that it was wrong to not sub in that instance. I also disagree it's a creampuff serve, it's inconsistent, but there's definitely worse serves out there. He also replaced Allick with a player who has 3 aces on the entire season (yes, this doesn't tell the whole story, but, it just makes me more skeptical if it's really worth it). No, I definitely didn't mean it was an absolute. It was a calculated gamble to end the set. Not unlike going for 2 to win a football game at the end because you are banged up and don't think your odds in overtime are good. Were they already into the front row with a 6-2 setter at that point? Problems were looming regardless if the set continued. I assume he knows his players, but I have also seen plenty of coaches, even at the high D1 level, who panic and make knee-jerk changes just to make a change, that then blow up in their face and it gets worse. Throw %*$# against the wall and see what sticks sort of coaching. I don't believe Cook is one of those, so I am assuming that he had some idea of improving the odds. Even if the serve is not better, the serve specialist is usually a better defender than the MB, so you also get that improvement in trying to score. I wasn't paying attention at that point. Did they only have 1 sub left? If so, they were already stuck and could not have swapped setters in any case, right? At that point one setter is stuck playing in a 5-1, and at the other spot you either let the Opp play through the back row or you use the sub to swap for a ds who then would have to play through the front row. Cook was screwed long-term either way in that case and chose to try and end it earlier since he was in a bad position to go forward trading points. |
|
|
|
Post by nu on Dec 10, 2022 21:54:30 GMT -5
"doghouse" might not be the best choice of word. Maybe it's Cook just juggling balls to find the right starting lineup and switching the lineup in-game to goose performance. This. ^^^^^^^^^^^ Seems to me this season was one juggle after another for the Huskers. It would be interesting to count all the different starting lineups all season long. Injuries (Batenhorst, Hames, Knuckles) certainly played a role but there was a lot of tinkering with different combinations throughout the year. Based on this article, Nebraska used 13 lineups this season. huskersillustrated.com/evolving-huskers-ready-for-athletic-ducks/ |
|
|
|
Post by volleynerd on Dec 12, 2022 20:07:32 GMT -5
FULL REPLAY ON YOUTUBE:
|
|
|
|
Post by knapplc on Dec 12, 2022 21:09:03 GMT -5
|
|
