Jump to content

SL Xpress

Full Members
  • Posts

    5070
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

SL Xpress last won the day on August 7 2021

SL Xpress had the most liked content!

Reputation

11103 Surly 1%

Recent Profile Visitors

6727 profile views
  1. I guess. I feel like a home and home like what we had with the limited teams in the Big 12 provides the most fairness. I don't know. It's not like I'm advocating for the dang thing. I just don't think the reason to have one is money. That's the main point.
  2. It also doesn't hurt the best teams' RPI, since they're not facing any of the dregs of the conference. I don't really think it's a money thing. I do not feel like the SEC volleyball tournament is going to be bringing in the big bucks. I think it's more of an exposure thing, a way of creating a little more fairness in an unbalanced regular season schedule, and a way of boosting RPI. The lower teams get to add more wins. The higher teams are excluded from playing the worst RPI teams, so they too can get a boost to their RPI. The SEC didn't win enough games in non conference to be the RPI juggernaut the Big 12 is, but the thinking in how the tournament was set up was somewhat strategic IMO. I don't think there's a volleyball coach out there who does a better job of managing RPI, or who thinks about RPI more than Elliott. He was a big influence in the Big 12 for getting everyone on board in managing their RPIs, which helps the conference as a whole. I would bet dollars to doughnuts he's doing some of the same stuff in the SEC right now. I wish they'd have a preseason media availability, the way the B1G does. It would force Elliott into an environment he doesn't like, but that he's really good at. Maybe he could get some real volleyball people to shoot him some questions. Just for the record, I'm not a fan of the SEC tournament. I feel like we're already in as a regional host right now if the season ended today. Instead there's a chance we lose in the first round (I don't think the chance is all that good) and put that in jeopardy. They'd probably get the overall #2 seed if they beat both A&M and Kentucky, but I don't think potentially moving up a couple of seeds is worth risking the regional, no matter how slim the odds are of losing it. I also don't like the idea of playing 3 matches in 3 days the week before the tournament. But this team probably needs the court time. So even though I'm against the tournament, I'm probably wrong about that stance in terms of how it benefits Texas this year.
  3. Well, they have one of the best outside hitters in the country. It's easy to take that for granted after Eggleston and Skinner, but Stafford is right at their level. I don't think she's quite as terminal as those two at their peak, but she's pretty darn close. It's like wondering if Bijan Robinson is as good as Earl Campbell and Ricky Williams. Not completely analogous, but the point is the same. At some level it doesn't matter any more. She's also better defensively in the back row, and I think she could be a really good back row attacker if we'd just use her more. Spears has fallen off in production on the right side, but a big part of that is she's not serving any more. She barely plays in the back row. I felt like one of our X factors was having Spears coming out of the back row on that D ball attack. She'd take that flying leap with her big swing, and it was really tough to defend. But we've gone away from hit. We haven't been good at featuring attacks from the right side consistently forever, and I don't think we're particularly good now. We're pretty freaking elite in the back row defense with Halter and Gary when we're on, but we're not as consistent as some of the best back row defenses. But we're still really good. We have a tall setter and an established double sub, so we're not going to have a short setter taken advantage of in the front row like other teams. I don't know that I'd call that elite, but it's a strength. I think our biggest strength is that they just don't quit. It's easy to take for granted those two come backs from down 5 late in the 5th set against both Stanford and Louisville, but that was elite. We did something similar to Tennessee in the 2nd set. We came back against Kentucky when it looked like we were going to get blown out on our home floor 2 sets in a row with a 10-1 run. We even made a run with Gary at the service line in the set we lost to South Carolina. I feel confident that's not going to be enough to win a national championship. Certainly not against Nebraska. But we could still host a regional. Almost definitely will if we can beat A&M in the SEC tournament. For what it's worth I feel like we have a better team than A&M, and they're really good this year. I feel like we have basically a 50/50 shot against whoever we match up with in the regional finals, if we can make it that far. There's a remote chance it's SMU. Or A&M. Then we'll have a puncher's chance in the Final Four if we can get there. I just wish our serve was better. The middle blockers were more productive today, but I guess they were selling out to the pins and that's what allowed them to close the block better than they have all season long, because the South Carolina middles feasted in that 3rd set. That was disheartening. It was senior day, and even though we have a good shot at 4 more home games, I'm going to miss Halter terribly, and I'm very grateful for both Kenna Miller and Kahahawai for spending their careers here, when they could have been starters elsewhere. I'm hopeful Miller goes on to get a graduate degree somewhere where she can play. Miller sang the national anthem before this game, btw. Apparently was amazing. I know she's done that at least once before.
  4. There was that 2019 LSU team But yeah, I agree.
  5. I bring something.
  6. That's great stuff. He's on a podcast called 6 rotations. He has awesome input. I had no idea he was doing Texas State VB. I appreciate you sharing!
  7. There's a lot of noise about Izzy Starck coming to Texas, too, but nothing I'd say is reliable. Her Mom was an All American at Texas back in the early 90s under Mick Haley. Erica Hibben Starck. I feel like that's where a lot of the rumors are being generated from. I was not a fan of bringing in Carlson, and I'm not a fan of bringing in Stucky or Starck. I am, however, a huge fan of Stucky. Elliott's going to do what he's going to do, though. He brought in SKT after we made it to the championship match, and that did a number on Gabriel (mind you, I was personally elated we brought in SKT - watching Kentucky abuse Gabriel on the front row rotations still gives me PTSD). He brought in Carlson after winning the national championship. If he feels like someone is going to make the team better, I bet he pulls the trigger. And he ain't calling me to check what my opinion is before he does so. This team desperately needs better serving and better production from the middle blockers. I hope it can be addressed through the portal. I have concerns the middle blocking is partly from the loss of Sullivan, but that's me being panicky. I'm going to miss Halter terribly. I wish there was some way we could bottle her and never let her go. Like a caged bird or something. All for us, none for you.
  8. It's the right approach. If they were to ever actually get good in volleyball I'd change my tune. It's not like I'm a Sooner fan in volleyball. They're like Darrell Royal's cockroaches.
  9. I really thought the volleyball gods were going to tease me again. Stanford pulls it out in Palo Alto. Pitt and Kentucky are the two teams ahead of Texas heading into this week in terms of potential seeding (along with Nebraska). I don't really care where Texas gets seeded as long as it's the top 4.. It can make a difference being the #2 seed overall versus the #4 seed in terms of who you play in the regional final, but sometimes you get bad luck in that the lower seeded team ends up being better, a la Texas in 2023 when we faced Stanford who was the overall #2 seed. And then you're going to have to face that caliber of an opponent again in the next round. Pitt losing, even if it's to Stanford, who also has a very good resume but Texas beat head to head is terrific. The ACC is the best conference in the country, at least at the top. I think Pitt, Stanford, and Louisville all have Final Four potential regardless what bracket they're in. Including Nebraska's. And SMU isn't that far behind. They swept the Aggies earlier this year. I was a little surprised they lost to UNC in 5 sets, since I thought UNC was a bit of a mirage, but it turns out they're a pretty good team this year, too. Some other good teams sprinkled in there, too. Way better than the SEC, regardless of how the SEC/ACC challenge went.
  10. It's volleyball. I have a hard time getting extreme emotions about them in volleyball because they've mostly been so inconsequential. The two times we've lost to them in Gregory a decade apart never felt good, but both of them were huge upsets. They had their best chance to take this in the 3rd. Never got to match point. They crawled back to tie it to send it to extended points, then could never deliver the knock out blow. Lost 28-26. Kentucky beat them the next two sets, then in the 5th had the big 13-7 lead before OU scratched and clawed their way back with a 6-1 run. But that's a really tough deficit to overcome unless you're Texas doing it almost purposefully. My problem is, the recipe they used to give Kentucky fits is not available to Texas for the most part. Basically tough serving and an aggressive front row. Kentucky is so pin dependent with Hudson and Deleye, and Mansfield loves his triple block on the OHes. He does it to Texas, too. Well, I'd love to see them again in the SEC tournament. We'll have to get through the first round opponent (really the opponent after the bye) then A&M, then the Wildcats.
  11. Oklahoma is now up 2 sets to 0 against Kentucky. In Kentucky. 25-18. 25-21. Kentucky had the lead late in the second set, but OU stormed back to win decisively. Deleye with several service reception errors. Maybe Texas had the right idea to go after her, but the wrong tools with their lollipop serves. Still, this would be an unbelievable upset if it were to transpire.
  12. A lot of times it's the setter. It's called a trap set where they set the attacker too close to the net and there's simply nothing they can do with it. And to go back further, sometimes that's the setter's fault, and sometimes it's the first contact's fault because they did a poor job of getting the ball to a spot where the setter had optimal options with the ball. Especially on a serve. Just easier to call it an error on the attacker and be done with it. But when I'm paying attention to games I do try to differentiate between the two. To me there's a difference between a team committing a lot of unforced errors with their attacks, and a team that's going against a buzzsaw where they're getting roofed all the time. Also, you don't want your team getting into a mindset where they feel like they have to tip every ball instead of swinging hard for fear of committing errors. You can't get too tentative at the net if you're going to win against other top teams.
  13. I mean, we don't have to argue it. It is an attack error full stop. By definition. It's just to me the two are differentiated a bit. And to international play as well. And to coaching staffs who track these things. But not in box scores. And that's okay. It's not like I feel jihadic about it like I do the stupid fucking ace/error ratio.
  14. That's exactly right. If I'm being perfectly honest, it often throws me for a loop, too. But I gave you my rationale, lol.
  15. I don't know the real answer, but I can give you my thoughts. When making an attack, three things can happen. Either the attack scores a point. The attack is defended. Or the attack scores a point for the other team. Kill percentage pretends like there's only two things that can happen. Either it scores a point or it doesn't. So in the end hitting percentage is an attempt to reflect that the hitter scored a point for the other team with their attack, and that's not good. I do have a bit of an issue in the fact blocks by the other team - when the front row defense actually scores a point by blocking the ball, as opposed to blocking it for another attempt by the attacking team - are counted the same as balls that are hit out of play. One feels like a forced error by the other team whereas the other feels more like an unforced error. I know coaching staffs break the two apart, and they're counted differently in international play, but in NCAA volleyball a block is also an attack error.
×
×
  • Create New...