|
|
Post by Hawk Attack on Nov 18, 2023 14:00:46 GMT -5
They get Wucherer next year. ...or skinner Wenaas |
|
|
|
Post by ilalum92 on Nov 18, 2023 14:07:09 GMT -5
So mad I missed this match. Mai my wanted to see how Chicoine was going to do against the big Wisco block. She struggled, as one would expect from a 5'9" hitter going up against the huge Wisconsin blockers. Only hit .085 for the match. She did well in serving and defense though. 5’9” on a good day with heels |
|
|
|
Post by ilalum92 on Nov 18, 2023 14:08:48 GMT -5
She struggled, as one would expect from a 5'9" hitter going up against the huge Wisconsin blockers. Only hit .085 for the match. She did well in serving and defense though. 5’9” on a good day with heels But she still is a stud even at that height. Reminds me of the WISC player a bunch of years back - Demi Morales??? |
|
|
|
Post by bruinsgold on Nov 18, 2023 14:14:22 GMT -5
5’9” on a good day with heels But she still is a stud even at that height. Reminds me of the WISC player a bunch of years back - Demi Morales??? Demi Morales was ridiculous! Loved her -- even when she was killing Purdue 😭😭😭 |
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Nov 18, 2023 14:16:57 GMT -5
5’9” on a good day with heels But she still is a stud even at that height. Reminds me of the WISC player a bunch of years back - Demi Morales??? And Deme was 5'7" I think Chicoine is better as a hitter, but Deme was a true sparkplug. |
|
|
|
Post by vbkahuna on Nov 18, 2023 15:12:49 GMT -5
Well duhhh, I wonder how that happened...oh wait: * Best OH from Michigan State (Franklin) transfers to Wisconsin * Best MB from Minnesota (Booth) transfers to Wisconsin * Best OH from Northwestern (Thomas-Ailara) transfers to Wisconsin * Best OH from Michigan (Mruzik) transfers to Penn State * Best setter from Ohio State (Podraza) transfers to Penn State Yeah, all those teams that worked their butts off to recruit, develop, and support those players kinda suck this year, huh? This makes no sense on any level. 1. Almost all those transfers are due to coaching changes. The coaching staffs that recruited, developed and supported those players were no longer there. Depending on who you are talking about, the players who transferred decided not to sit through an uncertain rebuilding process, or deal with toxic dynamics that led to or resulted from the coaching changes. You are arguing that players should have loyalty not to those who "worked their butts off" but to a faceless institution that largely did not, and actually may have worked against the athletes' interests in firing the coaching staff. That doesn't make sense. 2. The fact that they transferred in conference actually preserved what strength the conference had. If they had transferred out of conference the B1G would have been even less strong on paper. Yes it increased the inequity in the conference, but that really is down to the fact that many historically decent programs are in a rebuilding phase with new coaching staffs. Michigan, MSU, Ohio State, will get better again. PSU is just a little ahead of the rebuilding curve of those other programs. 3. As far as grad transfers are concerned, are you suggesting that a player who diligently contributed to a program for 4 years prior (or more in the case of redshirts) should be restricted to the grad academic opportunities at that same institution? In academia, it is not usually considered a good thing to only have experience from one institution, so in effect you would be punishing them for their prior commitment. In Podraza's case, she was forced to transfer to make scholarship room for the incoming class. It wasn't her choice by reports. I say, once they graduate, their commitment is done and they can make their choice based on whatever criteria they want. I don't think that is a controversial take. Actually, the question I was directly answering was whether the B1G as a conference is weaker this year, and if so why. Which I did, and it's completely accurate. I wasn't casting any aspersions on either the teams they went to or to the players. But you seem to be reacting like you feel guilty about your team's excess of luck in picking up so many of the top transfer. Nice rationalizations and sublimations. So, since YOU brought it up, OK, I'll respond to the issue of whether the current transfer rules are fair and whether they are good for the league long term. NO, and NO. There should be some reasonable rule regarding how many transfers can be allowed to play on a given team without at least sitting out a year as previously was the case. For example, some European pro leagues have similar restrictions on how many players from other countries can play for a given team. So, how many would be both fair and allow the league as a whole to develop? Name a number. But if you like that, I may even be fine with your team's current, what, 5, 6, or 7 all-stars IF the NCAA creates a rule that requires all transfers to wear their originating team's uniform the entire year. Yeah, badgerbreath, I'd be cool with that. How about you? |
|
|
|
Post by 25or624 on Nov 18, 2023 15:31:04 GMT -5
This makes no sense on any level. 1. Almost all those transfers are due to coaching changes. The coaching staffs that recruited, developed and supported those players were no longer there. Depending on who you are talking about, the players who transferred decided not to sit through an uncertain rebuilding process, or deal with toxic dynamics that led to or resulted from the coaching changes. You are arguing that players should have loyalty not to those who "worked their butts off" but to a faceless institution that largely did not, and actually may have worked against the athletes' interests in firing the coaching staff. That doesn't make sense. 2. The fact that they transferred in conference actually preserved what strength the conference had. If they had transferred out of conference the B1G would have been even less strong on paper. Yes it increased the inequity in the conference, but that really is down to the fact that many historically decent programs are in a rebuilding phase with new coaching staffs. Michigan, MSU, Ohio State, will get better again. PSU is just a little ahead of the rebuilding curve of those other programs. 3. As far as grad transfers are concerned, are you suggesting that a player who diligently contributed to a program for 4 years prior (or more in the case of redshirts) should be restricted to the grad academic opportunities at that same institution? In academia, it is not usually considered a good thing to only have experience from one institution, so in effect you would be punishing them for their prior commitment. In Podraza's case, she was forced to transfer to make scholarship room for the incoming class. It wasn't her choice by reports. I say, once they graduate, their commitment is done and they can make their choice based on whatever criteria they want. I don't think that is a controversial take. Actually, the question I was directly answering was whether the B1G as a conference is weaker this year, and if so why. Which I did, and it's completely accurate. I wasn't casting any aspersions on either the teams they went to or to the players. But you seem to be reacting like you feel guilty about your team's excess of luck in picking up so many of the top transfer. Nice rationalizations and sublimations. So, since YOU brought it up, OK, I'll respond to the issue of whether the current transfer rules are fair and whether they are good for the league long term. NO, and NO. There should be some reasonable rule regarding how many transfers can be allowed to play on a given team without at least sitting out a year as previously was the case. For example, some European pro leagues have similar restrictions on how many players from other countries can play for a given team. So, how many would be both fair and allow the league as a whole to develop? Name a number. But if you like that, I may even be fine with your team's current, what, 5, 6, or 7 all-stars IF the NCAA creates a rule that requires all transfers to wear their originating team's uniform the entire year. Yeah, badgerbreath, I'd be cool with that. How about you? These young women are adult student-athletes, not fungible and not chattel. They transferred as allowed by the NCAA Rules and that should be the end of the discussion. The "Greater Good" argument is specious @$$%*!*. |
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Nov 18, 2023 16:00:44 GMT -5
This makes no sense on any level. 1. Almost all those transfers are due to coaching changes. The coaching staffs that recruited, developed and supported those players were no longer there. Depending on who you are talking about, the players who transferred decided not to sit through an uncertain rebuilding process, or deal with toxic dynamics that led to or resulted from the coaching changes. You are arguing that players should have loyalty not to those who "worked their butts off" but to a faceless institution that largely did not, and actually may have worked against the athletes' interests in firing the coaching staff. That doesn't make sense. 2. The fact that they transferred in conference actually preserved what strength the conference had. If they had transferred out of conference the B1G would have been even less strong on paper. Yes it increased the inequity in the conference, but that really is down to the fact that many historically decent programs are in a rebuilding phase with new coaching staffs. Michigan, MSU, Ohio State, will get better again. PSU is just a little ahead of the rebuilding curve of those other programs. 3. As far as grad transfers are concerned, are you suggesting that a player who diligently contributed to a program for 4 years prior (or more in the case of redshirts) should be restricted to the grad academic opportunities at that same institution? In academia, it is not usually considered a good thing to only have experience from one institution, so in effect you would be punishing them for their prior commitment. In Podraza's case, she was forced to transfer to make scholarship room for the incoming class. It wasn't her choice by reports. I say, once they graduate, their commitment is done and they can make their choice based on whatever criteria they want. I don't think that is a controversial take. Actually, the question I was directly answering was whether the B1G as a conference is weaker this year, and if so why. Which I did, and it's completely accurate. I wasn't casting any aspersions on either the teams they went to or to the players. But you seem to be reacting like you feel guilty about your team's excess of luck in picking up so many of the top transfer. Nice rationalizations and sublimations. So, since YOU brought it up, OK, I'll respond to the issue of whether the current transfer rules are fair and whether they are good for the league long term. NO, and NO. There should be some reasonable rule regarding how many transfers can be allowed to play on a given team without at least sitting out a year as previously was the case. For example, some European pro leagues have similar restrictions on how many players from other countries can play for a given team. So, how many would be both fair and allow the league as a whole to develop? Name a number. But if you like that, I may even be fine with your team's current, what, 5, 6, or 7 all-stars IF the NCAA creates a rule that requires all transfers to wear their originating team's uniform the entire year. Yeah, badgerbreath, I'd be cool with that. How about you? No, you were making a case for why the conference is down this year, and then cited in-conference transfers, which doesn't make sense. If you wanted to make the case that transfers are the reason you would have cited somebody like Emma Monks who I'm watching now and is having a great season at Pitt. I just don't agree with anything else you are saying, because I am more concerned with the student's well being, which is where I believe a university's priority should be. You are more concerned with the feelings of fans of particular programs which requires prioritizing loyalty to institutions and which therefore implies universities should not prioritize student's interests. I just don't agree with that. Pro teams playing in leagues that limit foreign talent to ensure development of national talent and engagement of national fans. There are no restrictions regarding transfers between teams within those leagues. Are you arguing NCAA teams like GT should be limited in the number of foreign students they are allowed to play? |
|
