|
|
Post by huskergeek on Oct 22, 2023 13:57:18 GMT -5
GM 1- tied at 4-4. Nebraska gets a mix of luck, missed touch, and TTA being a wimp three times, and that's the match and the sweep for Wisconsin. No timeouts on that uncanny 5-point run by Sheff?  ... But yeah, that was the reason Wisconsin didn't walk out to the BOB 3-0. No it's not. That's not the way it works. I hate this idea because it assumes everything else remains the same which it absolutely wouldn't because for one obvious thing a different team is serving some of those points. It might have gone better for Wisconsin. It also might have gone worse. You can talk all you want about a missed touch or whatever excuse you want, but Nebraska outplayed Wisconsin in set one. |
|
|
|
Post by vbdiva on Oct 22, 2023 14:19:32 GMT -5
GM 1- tied at 4-4. Nebraska gets a mix of luck, missed touch, and TTA being a wimp three times, and that's the match and the sweep for Wisconsin. No timeouts on that uncanny 5-point run by Sheff? ... But yeah, that was the reason Wisconsin didn't walk out to the BOB 3-0. No it's not. That's not the way it works. I hate this idea because it assumes everything else remains the same which it absolutely wouldn't because for one obvious thing a different team is serving some of those points. It might have gone better for Wisconsin. It also might have gone worse. You can talk all you want about a missed touch or whatever excuse you want, but Nebraska outplayed Wisconsin in set one. That's fair. My beef is more with Sheff not slowing down the run. Some game management and I think game is definately going to WI. Nowhere else within the match was there a run like that. |
|
|
|
Post by 25or624 on Oct 22, 2023 14:43:16 GMT -5
No it's not. That's not the way it works. I hate this idea because it assumes everything else remains the same which it absolutely wouldn't because for one obvious thing a different team is serving some of those points. It might have gone better for Wisconsin. It also might have gone worse. You can talk all you want about a missed touch or whatever excuse you want, but Nebraska outplayed Wisconsin in set one. That's fair. My beef is more with Sheff not slowing down the run. Some game management and I think game is definately going to WI. Nowhere else within the match was there a run like that. More generally, I get frustrated by The Badgers' recurring problems in the first set against good teams, e.g. Pitt in The Elite 8 last year, Florida this year, last night and, of course, The 2021 Championship match.
Maybe Sheff should have called a time out, but this is an experienced team that shouldn't need a talking to so early in the match.
The Badger players have to own what they didn't do. The most glaring example is 12 service errors and no aces. Izzy had 5 SE.
They also have to own what they did do in the 5th set; 3 net violations and a service error. Sheff did call a timeout after Murray got 2 kills near the end of the 5th. She got another one right after the TO.
The Badgers biggest problem may be that there is no Dana Rettke to bail them out, e.g, when she made 2 incredible plays to save the second set in the 2021 Natty. Who is going to assume that role? The Badgers will need it to make a run.
|
|
|
|
Post by VT Karen on Oct 22, 2023 14:53:30 GMT -5
That's fair. My beef is more with Sheff not slowing down the run. Some game management and I think game is definately going to WI. Nowhere else within the match was there a run like that. More generally, I get frustrated by The Badgers' recurring problems in the first set against good teams, e.g. Pitt in The Elite 8 last year, Florida this year, last night and, of course, The 2021 Championship match.
Maybe Sheff should have called a time out, but this is an experienced team that shouldn't need a talking to so early in the match.
The Badger players have to own what they didn't do. The most glaring example is 12 service errors and no aces. Izzy had 5 SE.
They also have to own what they did do in the 5th set; 3 net violations and a service error. Sheff did call a timeout after Murray got 2 kills near the end of the 5th. She got another one right after the TO.
The Badgers biggest problem may be that there is no Dana Rettke to bail them out, e.g, when she made 2 incredible plays to save the second set in the 2021 Natty. Who is going to assume that role? The Badgers will need it to make a run.
I think Sarah Franklin is that go-to/bailout player for Wisconsin. In my opinion, the setting is the limiting factor for the Badgers and the incredible blocking and Nebraska hitting errors masked that deficiency for long stretches, especially in sets 2 and 3. Wisconsin had the match in hand but Nebraska capitalized on the small Badger errors which started to compound e.g. Smrek's hitting error late in set 4 and 3 straight net violations from Crawford and the end of the match. |
|
|
|
Post by vbdiva on Oct 22, 2023 14:59:25 GMT -5
I was pleased to see TTA play better overall. In Games 2-4, she took some successful, confident swings, which was a plus. But I can't help but think, what if Smrek (Shrek) had had a normal/average match yesterday? She was a nonfactor yesterday offensively. Robinson played OK -- her sets need to be a lot flatter or lower, or she needs to wait and beast it.
The match next month in the dungeon will tell us a lot.
Orzol was legit, and so was GG. The setting: Ashburn seems uncomfortable having to share the team again -- she seemed so much more dynamic and confident in the 5-1 (I'm not opposed to it btw)... her sets were steady, and she connected well with Shrek. Hammill is horrible on defense, and she leaves a lot of tip room open for opponents. Her sets were mediocre at best.
Besides going fishing, C.C. did a lot of good things.
Nebraska Impressions:
Beason -- incredible night and was a true leader
Setter -- One of the best and steady
Murray -- was meh, until her trick and lucky shots in the 5th, not too impressed by her game yesterday.
Action Jackson: Amazing at times, sometimes her youth showed
The X factor was the other OH, she was on fire and kept them in the match!
Becca: Non-factor
Passing/Defense/Hustle: 10/10
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2023 15:29:40 GMT -5
NE 69 kills WI 52. NE 193 Att WI 157 Only reason I can see in the stats. NE just keep swinging no matter what WI threw at them. Thats not the whole story. Nebraska had 44 errors and Wisconsin outblocked Nebraska 18 to 6. Where did I say that was the whole story. Oh right I didn't. I picked out a couple stats in context to their post. The rest is your assumptions. They posted, "how did wisco really not win" while talking about crazy stats. Those were the part of the stats that stood out in NE's favor. (again JUST IN THE STATS as posted) When teams get blocked a lot, you them get tentative, they stop swinging like they usually do, and some over compensate shifting to tips and bad swings. NE didn't, they kept swinging and didn't let the blocks scare them. And in some cases made small adjustments. Serving runs and passing were a factor too, among a lot of others things probably. |
|
|
|
Post by radioactiveman on Oct 22, 2023 15:39:09 GMT -5
GM 1- tied at 4-4. Nebraska gets a mix of luck, missed touch, and TTA being a wimp three times, and that's the match and the sweep for Wisconsin. No timeouts on that uncanny 5-point run by Sheff? ... But yeah, that was the reason Wisconsin didn't walk out to the BOB 3-0. Wisconsin played great. They could have easily won. It was a great match. But it's amazing how many Wisconsin fans insist on continuing to post embarassing take after embarassing take. Wisconsin has owned Nebraska for the past 6 years. They've won a NC during that time. They get another shot in a month on their home court. There's a high chance the outcome will be different then. All these posts about missed calls (ignoring questionable setter interference and throw calls against Nebraska), complaining about how Nebraska celebrates, posting about how bored the coaches look, beating your chests about hitting %... It's pathetic. |
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Oct 22, 2023 15:53:45 GMT -5
That's fair. My beef is more with Sheff not slowing down the run. Some game management and I think game is definately going to WI. Nowhere else within the match was there a run like that. More generally, I get frustrated by The Badgers' recurring problems in the first set against good teams, e.g. Pitt in The Elite 8 last year, Florida this year, last night and, of course, The 2021 Championship match.
Maybe Sheff should have called a time out, but this is an experienced team that shouldn't need a talking to so early in the match.
The Badger players have to own what they didn't do. The most glaring example is 12 service errors and no aces. Izzy had 5 SE.
They also have to own what they did do in the 5th set; 3 net violations and a service error. Sheff did call a timeout after Murray got 2 kills near the end of the 5th. She got another one right after the TO.
The Badgers biggest problem may be that there is no Dana Rettke to bail them out, e.g, when she made 2 incredible plays to save the second set in the 2021 Natty. Who is going to assume that role? The Badgers will need it to make a run.
Badgers usually start slow in matches lately. That's why I predicted they'd lose the first set last night. The one time that wasn't true was the Tennessee match when they looked unstoppable for a set and a half. I have always wondered if it's down to running a 6-2. It's almost like there has to be an in game adjustment period after practicing in a 5-1 all week. The other reason is TTA takes a while to get comfortable and she is usually starting matches in Woetation 1. But frankly, the badgers usually start slow relative to the huskers even before this season, then slowly creep back into the match after making adjustments. 12 service errors in a five set match is actually not high for the badgers. They average something like 2.67/set. Over 4.6 sets that equals 12.2. What was unusual was not getting any aces. They usually get as many aces as errors. How much of that is down to the quality of serves or the husker SR, I don't know. I imagine it was a combination. Against Maryland Izzy was landing serves a full yard in front of a splayed out BR player. I didn't see any of her serves have that kind of movement last night. The good blocking numbers could be partly down to the aggressive serving though, and a few overpass kills can be tied to the serving, so maybe that helps make up for the lack of aces. Badgers scored pretty frequently off of Izzy's serve last night, based on Rob's tally. The seven BEs is a lot for the badgers. I thought they started and ended the match rather jumpy. There is no need for them to be jumpy. That needs to get better. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2023 16:04:58 GMT -5
…while I understand your opinion, as long as it’s allowed, there’s a chance it can pay off. Just ask Kim Mulkey at LSU. It’s the modern day way. Nebraska may be in a situation in the future where they have to do it (although I highly doubt given they get the recruits) but if the rules allow it and it’s your best chance to be successful, you can’t blame them. It’s not that I blame them for operating within the NCAA rules, there was just something really queasy to me watching 5 transfers for Wisc play out on the floor last night. The recruitment/development pipeline just doesn’t matter as much as it used to (unless you’re Pitt/Neb ig?). Like I get it, if a vacancy occurs, fill it. But to completely build your roster off of the portal is just collection rather than program/player development. And recruits are gonna see that. “Why would I go there if I’ll just be sidelined to X’s conference player of the year?” I'm all for the portal because I support the players who make this all possible more. When you see a host of transfers all displacing recruited players, that is a bit of a bad look. It makes it look like you've given up on the rest of your roster you recruited, putting wins over development and players. Happens once, I'm sure most players will over look it. If it happens consistently year after year, players are going to start noticing and not want to be recruiting by those teams. Too early to point fingers at teams doing it regularly yet, and especially coming out of the the covid extension era when screwed with people's rosters. But I do think that is something to keep track of long term, especially players. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2023 16:12:54 GMT -5
All these poor, poor babies who are queasy because of the transfer portal. So sad for you  The transfer portal is great for players. It allows those players who are in bad situations, whether due to toxic relationships (players or coaches), lack of playing time for someone with starter talent, or a situation which doesn't allow full use of their talents, to move into a different situation. Kids transfer colleges all the time, for many reasons. This allows players to do it without some sort of "indentured servitude" penalty for doing so. Are there things that are bad about the transfer culture? Yes. Someone pointed out that it makes things harder for mid-level teams to rise up by recruiting stars and having those stars carry them to the next level. I mean, that's almost better though - now teams have to work their way up by creating a team full of good players and coaching them to be better as a team than the sum of parts. Then convincing stars that they are a destination point. Indiana is nearly there, and Michigan State may be next. And as for team culture? Well, if you're a good coach, you recruit players who will fit within the culture, regardless of portal or freshmen. But overall, the portal is positive for players. And there's not so much movement that fans can't identify with their teams because players change from year-to-year. . Overall I agree it is great for players. I'd rather the portal errs for them than programs, and give the players what is best for them. But there are times it could be great for transfer players, not so great for players that stays with the program and the negatives can't be just overlooked. I don't see much of anyone saying end all transfers because of this. Just that the portal might need adjusting. Perhaps a limit on how many transfers to each school, again speculation IF IF IF it becomes a problem for parity, for loyalty to recruits, etc. I'm not going to point at teams yet for just transferring in a new starting line up YET. If it starts happening regularly, that is something that might need a look at down the road. |
|
|
|
Post by tablealgebra on Oct 22, 2023 16:41:13 GMT -5
All these poor, poor babies who are queasy because of the transfer portal. So sad for you The transfer portal is great for players. It allows those players who are in bad situations, whether due to toxic relationships (players or coaches), lack of playing time for someone with starter talent, or a situation which doesn't allow full use of their talents, to move into a different situation. Kids transfer colleges all the time, for many reasons. This allows players to do it without some sort of "indentured servitude" penalty for doing so. Are there things that are bad about the transfer culture? Yes. Someone pointed out that it makes things harder for mid-level teams to rise up by recruiting stars and having those stars carry them to the next level. I mean, that's almost better though - now teams have to work their way up by creating a team full of good players and coaching them to be better as a team than the sum of parts. Then convincing stars that they are a destination point. Indiana is nearly there, and Michigan State may be next. And as for team culture? Well, if you're a good coach, you recruit players who will fit within the culture, regardless of portal or freshmen. But overall, the portal is positive for players. And there's not so much movement that fans can't identify with their teams because players change from year-to-year. . Overall I agree it is great for players. I'd rather the portal errs for them than programs, and give the players what is best for them. But there are times it could be great for transfer players, not so great for players that stays with the program and the negatives can't be just overlooked. I don't see much of anyone saying end all transfers because of this. Just that the portal might need adjusting. Perhaps a limit on how many transfers to each school, again speculation IF IF IF it becomes a problem for parity, for loyalty to recruits, etc. I'm not going to point at teams yet for just transferring in a new starting line up YET. If it starts happening regularly, that is something that might need a look at down the road. If they're not going to change it after Deion Sanders professionalized Colorado football (a move I dislike primarily because of how he treated the current players), then they aren't going to change it. |
|
|
|
Post by hammer on Oct 22, 2023 16:44:48 GMT -5
More generally, I get frustrated by The Badgers' recurring problems in the first set against good teams, e.g. Pitt in The Elite 8 last year, Florida this year, last night and, of course, The 2021 Championship match. Maybe Sheff should have called a time out, but this is an experienced team that shouldn't need a talking to so early in the match. The Badger players have to own what they didn't do. The most glaring example is 12 service errors and no aces. Izzy had 5 SE. They also have to own what they did do in the 5th set; 3 net violations and a service error. Sheff did call a timeout after Murray got 2 kills near the end of the 5th. She got another one right after the TO. The Badgers biggest problem may be that there is no Dana Rettke to bail them out, e.g, when she made 2 incredible plays to save the second set in the 2021 Natty. Who is going to assume that role? The Badgers will need it to make a run.
Badgers usually start slow in matches lately. That's why I predicted they'd lose the first set last night. The one time that wasn't true was the Tennessee match when they looked unstoppable for a set and a half. I have always wondered if it's down to running a 6-2. It's almost like there has to be an in game adjustment period after practicing in a 5-1 all week. The other reason is TTA takes a while to get comfortable and she is usually starting matches in Woetation 1. But frankly, the badgers usually start slow relative to the huskers even before this season, then slowly creep back into the match after making adjustments. 12 service errors in a twelve set match is actually not high for the badgers. They average something like 2.67/set. Over 4.6 sets that equals 12.2. What was unusual was not getting any aces. They usually get as many aces as errors. How much of that is down to the quality of serves or the husker SR, I don't know. I imagine it was a combination. Against Maryland Izzy was landing serves a full yard in front of a splayed out BR player. I didn't see any of her serves have that kind of movement last night. The good blocking numbers could be partly down to the aggressive serving though, and a few overpass kills can be tied to the serving, so maybe that helps make up for the lack of aces. Badgers scored pretty frequently off of Izzy's serve last night, based on Rob's tally. The seven BEs is a lot for the badgers. I thought they started and ended the match rather jumpy. There is no need for them to be jumpy. That needs to get better. Maybe Nebraska's HVAC guy reverses the airflow slightly at the end of each set ... Badgers are always serving downwind. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewwmic on Oct 22, 2023 16:45:40 GMT -5
More generally, I get frustrated by The Badgers' recurring problems in the first set against good teams, e.g. Pitt in The Elite 8 last year, Florida this year, last night and, of course, The 2021 Championship match. Maybe Sheff should have called a time out, but this is an experienced team that shouldn't need a talking to so early in the match. The Badger players have to own what they didn't do. The most glaring example is 12 service errors and no aces. Izzy had 5 SE. They also have to own what they did do in the 5th set; 3 net violations and a service error. Sheff did call a timeout after Murray got 2 kills near the end of the 5th. She got another one right after the TO. The Badgers biggest problem may be that there is no Dana Rettke to bail them out, e.g, when she made 2 incredible plays to save the second set in the 2021 Natty. Who is going to assume that role? The Badgers will need it to make a run.
I think Sarah Franklin is that go-to/bailout player for Wisconsin. In my opinion, the setting is the limiting factor for the Badgers and the incredible blocking and Nebraska hitting errors masked that deficiency for long stretches, especially in sets 2 and 3. Wisconsin had the match in hand but Nebraska capitalized on the small Badger errors which started to compound e.g. Smrek's hitting error late in set 4 and 3 straight net violations from Crawford and the end of the match. Franklin also broke down passing late in the 4th. She can have the best night ever but Orr (basically) aced her back to back in the red zone and then of course on set point. |
|
|
|
Post by bballnut90 on Oct 22, 2023 16:46:44 GMT -5
I was pleased to see TTA play better overall. In Games 2-4, she took some successful, confident swings, which was a plus. But I can't help but think, what if Smrek (Shrek) had had a normal/average match yesterday? She was a nonfactor yesterday offensively. Robinson played OK -- her sets need to be a lot flatter or lower, or she needs to wait and beast it. The match next month in the dungeon will tell us a lot. Orzol was legit, and so was GG. The setting: Ashburn seems uncomfortable having to share the team again -- she seemed so much more dynamic and confident in the 5-1 (I'm not opposed to it btw)... her sets were steady, and she connected well with Shrek. Hammill is horrible on defense, and she leaves a lot of tip room open for opponents. Her sets were mediocre at best. Besides going fishing, C.C. did a lot of good things. Agree on Ashburn. 5-1s almost always lead to most consistent setting and backrow play, though you sacrifice some blocking only have 2 hitters in the front row. I think it's too late now to make the switch, but I wish Wisconsin rolled the dice with Izzy in a 5-1 from the get go. The problem for UW is arguably their 2 biggest weapons both play on the right which means you likely relegate Smrek or Robinson to the bench in a 5-1. I think Wisconsin has the best overall team in volleyball this year but running a 6-2 creates setting issues and I think it could come back to bite them come tournament time. 6-2s just don't win championships. USC in 2002 is the only team that's won a title with a double sub 6-2 offense in the last 30+ years. Having consistency at the setting position is essential for a title team, especially in tight moments like we saw last night. |
|
|
|
Post by pcll0718 on Oct 22, 2023 17:01:24 GMT -5
I was pleased to see TTA play better overall. In Games 2-4, she took some successful, confident swings, which was a plus. But I can't help but think, what if Smrek (Shrek) had had a normal/average match yesterday? She was a nonfactor yesterday offensively. Robinson played OK -- her sets need to be a lot flatter or lower, or she needs to wait and beast it. The match next month in the dungeon will tell us a lot. Orzol was legit, and so was GG. The setting: Ashburn seems uncomfortable having to share the team again -- she seemed so much more dynamic and confident in the 5-1 (I'm not opposed to it btw)... her sets were steady, and she connected well with Shrek. Hammill is horrible on defense, and she leaves a lot of tip room open for opponents. Her sets were mediocre at best. Besides going fishing, C.C. did a lot of good things. Nebraska Impressions: Beason -- incredible night and was a true leader Setter -- One of the best and steady Murray -- was meh, until her trick and lucky shots in the 5th, not too impressed by her game yesterday. Action Jackson: Amazing at times, sometimes her youth showed The X factor was the other OH, she was on fire and kept them in the match! Becca: Non-factor Passing/Defense/Hustle: 10/10 Murray was meh, not too impressed with her game. Really? 7 kills in 5th set with match on the line, overall with poor hit%, played all 6 rotations with great results in back row. But “the other OH” was on fire and kept them in the match? Huh? She kept both teams in the match. Batenhorst hit .075 for the match, did not play back row or serve. Was good for a backup. Bekka. Perhaps forced some of the ineffectiveness from Smrek. On the bright side will be much better next time. |
|
... But yeah, that was the reason Wisconsin didn't walk out to the BOB 3-0.
