|
|
Post by slxpress on Feb 7, 2024 14:55:25 GMT -5
Ok, I think I've got everything updated as of today (2/7/24). Please let me know what I've missed! It's always appreciated! I appreciate your efforts. |
|
|
|
Post by hornfanaustin on Feb 7, 2024 15:48:23 GMT -5
Hey SEC folks,
Since we only know, well, Florida and most recently Kentucky could you give us Longhorns a grading for each SEC school on how serious they take volleyball? What I mean is how demanding is the school's AD on the performance of the coach at each school. What I do when I encounter a school we've never played is look up the history of a school on the NCAA web site. I look at how many different coaches they've had and how long each lasted before they were shown the door or they got a better job. What I also look is what the winning percentage of the coach during their tenure at that school. You can see the growing losing streaks of some schools, resulting in a new coach being named. But, I sometimes see a school where the winning percentage hovers around 50% for an abnormally long time and wonder why they kept the coach that long? Maybe they didn't view volleyball that important compared to the other varsity sports? Maybe they were changing ADs so often that the volleyball coach's poor record was one of the things the new AD didn't have time to focus on compared to other problems they inherited?
As for Texas, I can give it an obvious "A". But during research, I found that Texas had 4 women coaches before Mick Haley!
74-75 Pam Lampley - 0.577 75-76 Cheryl Lyman - 0.556 76-77 Jody Conradt* (!) - 0.587 77-78 Jody Conradt - 0.636 78-79 Linda Lowery - 0.676 79-80 Linda Lowery - 0.642 80-81 Mick Haley - 0.714
*This was a political move by the women's AD. She wanted to fire the women's (successful) male basketball coach and replace him with Jody. She told him, "Well, I have to let you go because you can't coach women's basketball AND volleyball like Jody can" (Jody had never coached volleyball and was surprised she was told she would be coaching volleyball).
And then, my own theory that has no basis, Oklahoma has been a "C" until they realized they were going to be entering the SEC and wanted to look better than they have been for a while. They actually fired their coach that came over from Kentucky after giving her only 5 years.
|
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Feb 7, 2024 16:44:42 GMT -5
Hey SEC folks, Since we only know, well, Florida and most recently Kentucky could you give us Longhorns a grading for each SEC school on how serious they take volleyball? What I mean is how demanding is the school's AD on the performance of the coach at each school. What I do when I encounter a school we've never played is look up the history of a school on the NCAA web site. I look at how many different coaches they've had and how long each lasted before they were shown the door or they got a better job. What I also look is what the winning percentage of the coach during their tenure at that school. You can see the growing losing streaks of some schools, resulting in a new coach being named. But, I sometimes see a school where the winning percentage hovers around 50% for an abnormally long time and wonder why they kept the coach that long? Maybe they didn't view volleyball that important compared to the other varsity sports? Maybe they were changing ADs so often that the volleyball coach's poor record was one of the things the new AD didn't have time to focus on compared to other problems they inherited? As for Texas, I can give it an obvious "A". But during research, I found that Texas had 4 women coaches before Mick Haley! 74-75 Pam Lampley - 0.577 75-76 Cheryl Lyman - 0.556 76-77 Jody Conradt* (!) - 0.587 77-78 Jody Conradt - 0.636 78-79 Linda Lowery - 0.676 79-80 Linda Lowery - 0.642 80-81 Mick Haley - 0.714 *This was a political move by the women's AD. She wanted to fire the women's (successful) male basketball coach and replace him with Jody. She told him, "Well, I have to let you go because you can't coach women's basketball AND volleyball like Jody can" (Jody had never coached volleyball and was surprised she was told she would be coaching volleyball). And then, my own theory that has no basis, Oklahoma has been a "C" until they realized they were going to be entering the SEC and wanted to look better than they have been for a while. They actually fired their coach that came over from Kentucky after giving her only 5 years.
Your assessment of Oklahoma's past investment isn't on base. They've invested/paid coaches well relative to the standard in the conference and have provide enough resources for the staffs to recruit good talent. The last coach didn't work out (and there were obviously some issues with chemistry - transfers and the lawsuit about "wokeness", remember?) that made it difficult on the program but I don't know how that would get pegged on a lack of institutional support. The previous coach was also good and successful - until he wasn't - and I'd say the administration acted prudently in pulling the plug at the right time and showed desire to be successful. |
|
|
|
Post by hornfanaustin on Feb 7, 2024 17:00:51 GMT -5
Hey SEC folks, Since we only know, well, Florida and most recently Kentucky could you give us Longhorns a grading for each SEC school on how serious they take volleyball? What I mean is how demanding is the school's AD on the performance of the coach at each school. What I do when I encounter a school we've never played is look up the history of a school on the NCAA web site. I look at how many different coaches they've had and how long each lasted before they were shown the door or they got a better job. What I also look is what the winning percentage of the coach during their tenure at that school. You can see the growing losing streaks of some schools, resulting in a new coach being named. But, I sometimes see a school where the winning percentage hovers around 50% for an abnormally long time and wonder why they kept the coach that long? Maybe they didn't view volleyball that important compared to the other varsity sports? Maybe they were changing ADs so often that the volleyball coach's poor record was one of the things the new AD didn't have time to focus on compared to other problems they inherited? As for Texas, I can give it an obvious "A". But during research, I found that Texas had 4 women coaches before Mick Haley! 74-75 Pam Lampley - 0.577 75-76 Cheryl Lyman - 0.556 76-77 Jody Conradt* (!) - 0.587 77-78 Jody Conradt - 0.636 78-79 Linda Lowery - 0.676 79-80 Linda Lowery - 0.642 80-81 Mick Haley - 0.714 *This was a political move by the women's AD. She wanted to fire the women's (successful) male basketball coach and replace him with Jody. She told him, "Well, I have to let you go because you can't coach women's basketball AND volleyball like Jody can" (Jody had never coached volleyball and was surprised she was told she would be coaching volleyball). And then, my own theory that has no basis, Oklahoma has been a "C" until they realized they were going to be entering the SEC and wanted to look better than they have been for a while. They actually fired their coach that came over from Kentucky after giving her only 5 years.
Your assessment of Oklahoma's past investment isn't on base. They've invested/paid coaches well relative to the standard in the conference and have provide enough resources for the staffs to recruit good talent. The last coach didn't work out (and there were obviously some issues with chemistry - transfers and the lawsuit about "wokeness", remember?) that made it difficult on the program but I don't know how that would get pegged on a lack of institutional support. The previous coach was also good and successful - until he wasn't - and I'd say the administration acted prudently in pulling the plug at the right time and showed desire to be successful. I may be wrong about OU. It's just that the last few years of Restrepo, as Texas would roll over them and they looked BAD, I kept wondering why the OU admin were still hanging on to him. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed crushing them and their bad coach and their bad players. Same thoughts on WVU as well. I mean, that was even worse! (but they're not going into the SEC, so I didn't mention them) |
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Feb 7, 2024 17:12:27 GMT -5
Your assessment of Oklahoma's past investment isn't on base. They've invested/paid coaches well relative to the standard in the conference and have provide enough resources for the staffs to recruit good talent. The last coach didn't work out (and there were obviously some issues with chemistry - transfers and the lawsuit about "wokeness", remember?) that made it difficult on the program but I don't know how that would get pegged on a lack of institutional support. The previous coach was also good and successful - until he wasn't - and I'd say the administration acted prudently in pulling the plug at the right time and showed desire to be successful. I may be wrong about OU. It's just that the last few years of Restrepo, as Texas would roll over them and they looked BAD, I kept wondering why the OU admin were still hanging on to him. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed crushing them and their bad coach and their bad players. Same thoughts on WVU as well. I mean, that was even worse! (but they're not going into the SEC, so I didn't mention them) I don't think any competent admin would have let him go sooner. He had made the tourney for 7 straight, 9 out of 10 years before declining in the last three - and they didn't really bottom out until the last year. You don't fire coaches with a solid decade of tenure for a bad year or two. I suspect at somewhere that didn't care about volleyball, he would have hung on for many more. And Gray-Walton was considered an excellent hire at the time. |
|
|
|
Post by donut on Feb 7, 2024 17:54:36 GMT -5
My recommendation to Texas fans who want to learn more about SEC volleyball, would be to watch SEC volleyball matches from the last year or two. There are a ton available on Youtube. If you're familiar with UK and UF, go watch some Mizzou, Georgia, A&M, LSU and Auburn (in addition to Tennessee and Arkansas, which are more obvious). I think which programs are more "serious" about volleyball will be pretty apparent.
The problem with looking at historical W/L% is that most of the programs taking volleyball "seriously" in the SEC didn't do so in the past. LSU, Georgia, A&M, and Auburn have all recently made moves to show they are more "serious" about volleyball now, but you aren't really seeing that in the results. I would also say Mizzou takes volleyball at least as "seriously" as Kentucky.
I think you can question how "serious" the Mississippi schools and South Carolina are. Everyone else seems to care a bit more every year.
|
|
|
|
Post by turkeytime on Feb 8, 2024 16:25:50 GMT -5
Ok, I think I've got everything updated as of today (2/7/24). Please let me know what I've missed! It's always appreciated! Bama roster is out and Gryniewicz is not on it. |
|
|
|
Post by vbshrink on Feb 8, 2024 20:22:29 GMT -5
Ok, I think I've got everything updated as of today (2/7/24). Please let me know what I've missed! It's always appreciated! Bama roster is out and Gryniewicz is not on it. Wow! Ok… |
|
|
|
Post by horns1 on Feb 8, 2024 21:45:04 GMT -5
So, what has been the typical (non-COVID) conference scheduling format? I recall they don't play conference matches on Saturday, but instead opt for Sundays (except that last weekend of the season).
This past season, with 13 schools fielding volleyball programs, the conference schedule consisted of 18 matches. Each school played 6 opponents at home and on the road; so, that accounted for 12 conference matches. The other 6 opponents were played only once either at home or on the road.
Has anything been decided for 2024? With 15 schools fielding volleyball programs, that most likely means playing all 14 opponents at least once. If sticking with an 18-match schedule, that means playing only 4 opponents at home and on the road.
Looking at A&M's 2023 conference schedule, they played the following 6 opponents at home and on the road: Florida, Miss. State, Ole Miss, Mizzou, Tennessee and Alabama. So, no real geographic tendencies as they did not play either LSU or Arkansas twice. Seemed very random as to who they played twice.
Anxious to see some scheduling decisions being made sooner rather than later!
|
|
|
|
Post by nakedcrayon on Feb 9, 2024 0:05:50 GMT -5
Would love to see when Vandy is added all teams play each other and a either mid season tourney and/or end of season tourney for the remaining matches
15 plus however many or what type of tourney you have
But i prefer balanced schedules personally
|
|
|
|
Post by secinsc on Feb 9, 2024 7:01:03 GMT -5
Ok, I think I've got everything updated as of today (2/7/24). Please let me know what I've missed! It's always appreciated! Per the ticket holder newsletter, Ruprich and Whitesides are returning for the Gamecocks. |
|
|
|
Post by vbshrink on Feb 9, 2024 11:07:22 GMT -5
Ok, I think I've got everything updated as of today (2/7/24). Please let me know what I've missed! It's always appreciated! Per the ticket holder newsletter, Ruprich and Whitesides are returning for the Gamecocks. Fantastic news for the Gamecocks - thanks! |
|
|
|
Post by horns1 on Feb 15, 2024 23:36:26 GMT -5
So, what has been the typical (non-COVID) conference scheduling format? I recall they don't play conference matches on Saturday, but instead opt for Sundays (except that last weekend of the season). This past season, with 13 schools fielding volleyball programs, the conference schedule consisted of 18 matches. Each school played 6 opponents at home and on the road; so, that accounted for 12 conference matches. The other 6 opponents were played only once either at home or on the road. Has anything been decided for 2024? With 15 schools fielding volleyball programs, that most likely means playing all 14 opponents at least once. If sticking with an 18-match schedule, that means playing only 4 opponents at home and on the road. Looking at A&M's 2023 conference schedule, they played the following 6 opponents at home and on the road: Florida, Miss. State, Ole Miss, Mizzou, Tennessee and Alabama. So, no real geographic tendencies as they did not play either LSU or Arkansas twice. Seemed very random as to who they played twice. Anxious to see some scheduling decisions being made sooner rather than later! B1G conference released its 20-match conference schedule (home / away) opponents for its 18 programs. Each school will face 7 opponents only at home, 7 opponents only on the road, and 3 opponents both at home and on the road. Anyone know when the SEC will drop its scheduling format for 2024? Anyone recall when it was released for 2023? |
|
|
|
Post by nakedcrayon on Feb 15, 2024 23:54:31 GMT -5
We are usually later than most if i recall correctly
and adding 2 programs should not take long but logistics can come into play a bit. I think the Big 12 played different nights during the week then SEC typically does for most of its matches
|
|
|
|
Post by HeyHey on Feb 16, 2024 10:33:06 GMT -5
Would love to see when Vandy is added all teams play each other and a either mid season tourney and/or end of season tourney for the remaining matches 15 plus however many or what type of tourney you have But i prefer balanced schedules personally I have heard that the SEC IS going to have a end of season tournament before the NCAAs. |
|
