|
|
Post by nevollfan on Oct 25, 2023 10:58:35 GMT -5
Surprising to me in the match is the Nebraska 44 hitting errors. Wow. Other things are Nebraska had 17 more kills. Two contradictory stats. With Nebraska having very good passing numbers. One would think the hitting numbers would be better. Wisconsin had unreal blocking numbers and touches too. Wisconsin had underrated backcourt play. Franklin was the best player on the floor for Wisconsin. Just really good numbers hitting and stellar backcourt play. So many weapons for Wisconsin with so many proven experienced players. Nebraska, mentally, stayed in the match even with those deflating second set and third set blocks against them. Besides the very numerous hitting errors. I think Nebraska won the match with the home court advantages and being mentally tenacious with so many hitting errors. Both teams found things about themselves and the opponent that are great teaching lessons. Both teams played exceptionally hard, very well for long periods and gained confidence from the match. Plus things to work on in the weeks and matches ahead. It was an epic match and another boost for women’s indoor volleyball. The hitting errors and ++ kills are consistent with Wisconsin’s dominant block. They aren’t contradictory. Wisconsin was scoring off blocks so they get less kills and those blocks count as hitting errors for Nebraska. I guess my main point was, but not stated clearly, is Nebraska won the match against the number one ranked team with 44 hitting errors. In a five set match. Unheard of statistically, I would guess, if someone researched match results against top competition. Even in an epic win, Nebraska has so many plays to learn and grow from. Especially on the offensive side with decisions on who to set, the set execution and the way to attack and its effectiveness. |
|
|
|
Post by savannahbadger on Oct 25, 2023 14:57:00 GMT -5
okay Nebraska is obviously a great passing team but those numbers are ridiculous and I think Wisconsin needs to take a good hard look at those bc no way any team should ever pass that well even if they had a passing line up of Larson, Gabi, Moki…. I think we might be OK with that kind of passing if the opponent is hitting .130 or lower. You’d think a team would hit .400+ for the match the way Nebraska passed. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2023 23:53:47 GMT -5
This thread is officially # 2 on the all-time long threads list.
|
|
|
|
Post by huskernkc on Oct 26, 2023 7:52:23 GMT -5
NEB does the exact same... maybe thats why BOTH NEB & WI passed their best.... That's funny. One of the years was 2019, and the Nebraska practice was the one I didn't stay for. But one year (also 2019?) Notre Dame had an assistant holding a radar gun, calling out mph for the serves. The focus was *entirely* velocity. The difference was striking. i was talking to my wife last night about his---i am surprised a coach doesn't go to an engineering department (or someone really intelligent) and calculate the ideal speed for a volleyball to clear the net and yet land in court.. variable speeds work great, i.e. Kenzie maloney serving prowess, but seems there are more mph on serves now, or at least a emphasis on it. |
|
|
|
Post by vergyltantor on Oct 26, 2023 8:11:15 GMT -5
One of the years was 2019, and the Nebraska practice was the one I didn't stay for. But one year (also 2019?) Notre Dame had an assistant holding a radar gun, calling out mph for the serves. The focus was *entirely* velocity. The difference was striking. i was talking to my wife last night about his---i am surprised a coach doesn't go to an engineering department (or someone really intelligent) and calculate the ideal speed for a volleyball to clear the net and yet land in court.. variable speeds work great, i.e. Kenzie maloney serving prowess, but seems there are more mph on serves now, or at least a emphasis on it. Some papers on the aerodynamics of a volleyball have been done. Two can be found here and here. |
|
|
|
Post by vbgeezer on Oct 26, 2023 8:49:19 GMT -5
It helps to have a basic understanding of what a Reynolds number is: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynolds_numberA lower Reynolds number suggests a flatter (laminar) path of flight, while a higher number indicates a more turbulent (wavy) flight path for a volleyball. If I understand the article referred to in the previous post correctly, a conventional (Molten MTV5SLIT) volleyball is able to achieve higher Reynolds numbers than a new (Molten V5M5000) ball, and that balls traveling at higher speeds generally achieve higher Reynolds numbers. Initially, I thought the authors' comparison was used vs new balls, but instead it was different models of Molten-branded volleyballs. The balls in this article were tested in 2010, and neither of those models are being used today by the NCAA. I believe the balls used by NCAA women today is Molten’s IV58L‐N Super Touch. As such, I'm not sure how useful the data in the article is in today's games. If it is OK to copy/paste from Wikipedia, then this (below) may be useful in comparing used (rougher) vs. new (smoother) balls: At higher Reynolds numbers the drag on a sphere depends on surface roughness. Thus, for example, adding dimples on the surface of a golf ball causes the boundary layer on the upstream side of the ball to transition from laminar to turbulent. The turbulent boundary layer is able to remain attached to the surface of the ball much longer than a laminar boundary and so creates a narrower low-pressure wake and hence less pressure drag. The reduction in pressure drag causes the ball to travel further. My conclusion from all this is that if I were serving a volleyball and hoping to make it difficult for my opponents to properly receive it, I would want to use a rougher (older) volleyball and I would try to hit it hard (fast). That assumes I am able to keep my serve inbounds. I doubt if that information helps anybody. If I missed something, please correct me. |
|
mediawatcher
Sophomore
It Don't Mean A Thing If It Ain't Got That Swing
Posts: 159
|
Post by mediawatcher on Oct 26, 2023 22:47:38 GMT -5
So proud of those Husker Freshman winning.
GBR.
|
|
|
|
Post by letsgored on Dec 14, 2023 23:26:09 GMT -5
Worst set since 2003.
Burn the tape. Move on.
We got this. Dominate set 4.
On Wisconsin!
|
|
|
|
Post by Cooper on Dec 14, 2023 23:30:35 GMT -5
Worst set since 2003. Burn the tape. Move on. We got this. Dominate set 4. On Wisconsin! LOL. Wrong location. Wrong game. Wrong month. |
|
|
|
Post by horns1 on Dec 15, 2023 0:27:55 GMT -5
Worst set since 2003. Burn the tape. Move on. We got this. Dominate set 4.
On Wisconsin!  |
|
|
|
Post by Kingsley on Dec 15, 2023 0:29:41 GMT -5
Oh wow, I vaguely remember this match eroding my soul
|
|
