Texas A&M Wins 2025 NCAA Women's Volleyball Championship, Sweeps Pitt and Kentucky in Final Four

Hi volleyball fans and welcome back to Volley
Talk, the podcast created for volleyball lovers
who want to dig deep into what is going on in
NCAA and international volleyball. I'm your host
Sarah Pavan. I'm an Olympian, beach volleyball
world champion, former Nebraska Cornhusker, and
longtime pro, both indoor and on the beach. And
I'm Adam Schultz, former indoor player, international
volleyball coach, and the show's resident stat
guy. NCAA women's volleyball season is officially
over. Great weekend of volleyball played in Kansas
City. Some matches better than others. So we
are going to dive into all things NCAA Final
Four. We have some loose ends to tie up in the
NCAA space. But yeah, we are excited to get going.
The holidays are upon us. It's a great time.
So let's get started. Okay, first things first,
men's club world championships happened this
past week, obviously coinciding with the final
four, so you know what we watched, the final
four. But just a high -level overview, similar
to the women, there were eight teams. So in pool
A, Zawierce, look at that accent, from Poland
won their pool. followed by Valle Renata, Praia
Klubi, and a team from Qatar. So Zavirze and
Renata moved on. In pool B, we had Perugia win,
Japan, Osaka, Blueton second, Santa Cruzero third,
and a Libyan team came fourth. In the semifinals,
we had Osaka, Blueton took down Zavirze three,
which surprised me. And Perugia beat Renata 3
-0. In the final, Perugia beat Osaka 3 straight.
It was a very decisive night, day, everybody.
And then for bronze, Zaverze beat Renata 3 straight.
3 -0, 3 -0, 3 -0. Yes, all over the place. Hopefully
they sold one ticket for the whole day. Perugia
won gold, Osaka took silver, and Zaverze took
gold. bronze the perugia won champions league
last year so they had a very good year the italian
clubs the italian national teams 2025 was the
year of palo volo okay forgive volleyball it's
palo volo now men's and women's world champions
for national team men's and women's world champions
for club because scandici won women's so if you're
italian it's great for it's been a great year
if you're italian you're loving this if you're
not italian and you just love great volleyball
you're also loving this so huge congrats to perugia
we'll be following the champions league discussions
and what is happening as we get into the new
year we also had the All -American teams named
and the major player of the year, et cetera,
awards. Okay, so I'm just going to say our predictions
last week were true. I didn't have Jamie Morrison
on my radar. I think you might have. I don't
remember. I don't think so. Okay, just kidding.
So Jamie Morrison from Texas A &M was named coach
of the year. Let me ask you this. If they don't
make the final four, does he get coach of the
year? No. So this is for me. That's my issue
with this. I mean, don't get me wrong. Jamie
took a program. If there was a four -year award
for Coach of the Year, he took these kids. He
taught them how to be winners. They came out.
They won a national championship. It's a great
story. Coach of the Year, to me, should take
into account not just the last week. I'm glad
he won it. I'm glad he's getting recognition.
Fully deserved for the body of work over, you
know, again, four years. But in terms of just
this year, that surprised me. We were on the
Craig Skinner, Dave Shondell train. I understand
why he won it. They did some amazing things,
obviously. Good for him. I'm happy for him. I
don't have an issue with it. I'm just saying
it's that award out of all of them, to me, had
a very big recency bias attached to it, which
is fine. Freshman of the year was Cassie O 'Brien.
That was my prediction after last week. Yeah,
you were right. What is that? I don't think she
played well in the finals. Again, we talked about
it not being a residency award. But are we talking
about a body of work? Yeah. I don't think she's
the most talented freshman. I think she did a
really good job being in a hard position as a
setter as a first year with lots of expectations.
And to her credit, she did improve. So I understand
why she got it. I just don't think from a pure
volleyball standpoint. She was better than a
couple of the other candidates. Just my opinion.
But do you think the other freshmen who didn't
make the final four were that much better than
her? Like heads and shoulders better than her
to have earned that? Because she, in my opinion
of the final four teams, is the one that is most
deserving. I will agree with that for the final
four teams. But that's kind of how, like, I understand
what you're saying for the coach piece, but.
I mean, if that if the recency bias applied to
the players, too, we would have seen Kendall
Storrs get a first team All -American. We would
have seen Nikki get first team All -American
and they didn't. Yeah, no, that's fair. And I
again, I don't think the gap between her and
some of the other freshmen like Suli Davis or
who lost first round. Yeah. Again, I'm not I'm
not really taking tournament performance into
account there. I just I think that the other
couple others were. better overall volleyball
players, but she was in a really tough spot as
a freshman setter, and she managed that incredibly
well, to her credit. So, you know, if you put
that in there, the difficulty that she was in,
it is deserved. It's fair. And finally, National
Player of the Year was Olivia Babcock. Even watching,
I know they didn't win again, but she's just
better than everybody else. She's better than
everybody. Like, what are you going to say? No,
nothing. Nothing. And she carried that team all
season long. And we are going to dive into their
match against Texas A &M here in a second. But
you can't stop her. The only reason you could
give it to Bergen if Nebraska won the Final Four
was because her numbers in terms of her team.
That's what I meant. Made the Final Four. Her
numbers in terms of what her team. is something
that you never see done. It was a historic hitting
percentage. And you're not comparing apples to
apples, so you can give her that nod. But giving
any other hitter in the NCAA the award over Babcock
is outrageous. If Wisconsin had won, I could
have made a case for Mimi Collier to get it.
If they had made the final. But once they didn't,
it was like, okay, it's for sure. It has to be
Babcock. And that's the thing. I think if Nebraska
had made the final four, I think Bergen -Riley
would have won it. Agreed. But the second they
did and I was like, no, I think it's Babcock
for sure. So that is what happened there for
the All -American Awards on the first team. We're
only talking about the first team. Otherwise,
we know how Adam feels about Santa's laundry
list of names that are on the website is just
too long to get into. Nola Barrows, one setter
and two medals. I honestly didn't expect any
liberos to get it. We've talked about how it's
like kind of a dry year or like a drought year
in NCAA volleyball. But I think that that says
everything. That is basically outside hitters
or pin hitters. Getting all the credit. Getting
all the credit. We're a little thirsty for some
good setters here. Some good liberos. Or rather
like that level of difference making liberos.
But. The setter who made it, obviously, Bergen
Riley from Nebraska. The two middles that made
it, Ifeana Kosakpala from Texas A &M. Andy Jackson
from Nebraska. Are there any names in the middle
blocker, setter, or libero category that you
think were snubbed? I think if Furbringer hadn't
been hurt and missed time, I think she could
have gotten a nod. I, after really watching...
whack play she is not spectacular in anything
and I mean that entirely as a compliment you
don't notice her unless you really really pay
attention to how she runs her offense which was
incredible to watch so she was a 13 yeah that's
again you really have to watch her to understand
the value she brings to her team and having studied
Texas A &M over the last couple weeks She is,
it's a crime how underrated she is. Well, although
we did say her, like, against, in the regional
final, we were like, where the heck is her back
set? She found it. Yeah, I didn't have any issue.
I did not have that comment this week. So, I
mean, I'm with everybody else. If you had have
said Maddie Wack to me three weeks ago, I'd have
been like, who? No, she doesn't, but man, she
was outstanding. He played really well in the
Final Four. Those would be recency bias included
for WAC. Those would be two centers. Adam's not
a fan of recency bias, but he also is. In this
case, it drew attention to somebody who I think
has been obviously good for that team for a while.
Middle -wise, I mean, I think Rebecca Alec had
a phenomenal season. I get why she's not on the
list, but I think she was good enough. Maybe
Cara Cressy would be a potential there, but those
would be it. You? Rebecca Alec was second team.
Lizzie Andrew from Stanford was second team.
Kira Reinhart from Creighton was second team.
Jayla Auguste, third team. Cressy was third team.
Carter Booth was third team. So, like, we're
talking some really good middles that didn't
even get second team here. Yeah, and I mean,
Booth was really good down the stretch, but they
didn't use her enough. If she had received the
number of sets that she got in the finals, I
think she would have been much more on that radar,
but she was just underutilized. I think in general,
this was the year of the underutilized middle.
Oh, there you have it. Trademark that. So the
other athletes that made the first Team All -American
list were Olivia Babcock, Mimi Collier, Brooklyn
DeLay, Noemi Glover. How do you feel about Brooklyn
DeLay being on that list? Do you think she had
a great year? Yes. Okay. Laura Marie Heredia
Colon, Eva Hudson, Malaya Jones. Kennedy Martin,
Harper Murray, Elia Rubin, and Tori Stafford.
I don't have a problem with anybody on that list.
The one, and I think she got on just because
of the conference she plays on. Noemi Glover
was very good for her team. I could probably
pick a few people from the second team list that
I would have put ahead of her. But again, I think
it's because of the conference that she plays
on. When they won their conference. Correct.
And again, I don't have anything. I really like
her fantasy player for us. How well does she
do in the Big Ten, you know, or in the SEC? I'm
not entirely sure. So that was maybe the only
question mark for me. If I had to pick any player
that I was like, I don't know, it would be her.
But honestly, I have no issues with this list.
No, I think I think it's well done. And I think
it just reflects that the strength in the NCAA
was in the left sides and right sides of the
season. If we're actually looking, the only liberos
that made first, second, or third team were Rachel
Van Gorp, who was second team. I believe she
got ABCA Libero of the Year from Iowa State.
Maya Sands was third team from Missouri. Molly
Tuzzo was third team from Kentucky. It's criminal
to me. Lola Schumacher did not get at least some
sort of nod. She was outstanding this year for
UCLA. But UCLA didn't really do anything. True.
Fair. And I'm sure there's lots of players who
are good for their teams. I thought she was spectacular.
So, I don't know. I personally am totally fine
with this list. Agreed. I think, yeah, the top
14 players are the ones that are there. Even
the player of the year lists, slight question
mark on, as you're calling it, recency bias for
Jamie Morrison. But, yeah. What are you going
to say now? So... Let's dive into the final four
matches. We are going to start with the semifinals
and Texas A &M versus Pitt. Before we get into
the specifics, tell me the way you watched that
match and the way it felt. Did it feel like a
three -set sweep? I mean, the sets were pretty
close. Pitt had leads. They did. In at least
two of the three sets. Watching it, it felt like
a full team against one person. Let's go back
and talk about what we thought the keys to success
for each team were going to be. So we talked
about Pitt having to get their middles going
and having to have threats other than Babcock.
That just didn't happen. The crazy thing for
me watching that high level was that Pitt's middles
were successful, really successful when they
set them. And they just didn't. They got 14 total
sets and they had nine kills. Babcock got 41
sets. Bayless got 17 for 58. You can't do that.
Everybody knew down the stretch when Pitt needed
to score points where the ball was going to go.
There was no question. No, which I think is fair.
I think it's fair that everybody knows where
the ball is going to go when the game's on the
line. The only time Mosher ran the middle was
A, when the pass was tight and she couldn't set
anybody else, or when the pass was absolutely
perfect, which didn't happen often. She wasn't
taking any risks to set the middle at all. But
I feel like this is what we've been talking about
with Pitt all season. 100%. All season long.
They made no adjustments from the start of the
season till the end. And that's what we saw.
Mosier just does not look comfortable setting
the middle unless she's not moving. Anything
off the net, no middle set. For me, this is a
coaching error. We saw all four teams in the
final four evolve as the season went on, in my
opinion, except for Pitt. It just wasn't good
enough. Babcock's incredible. She's by far the
best hitter. If you always... Well, she almost
did do it by herself. Yes. She almost did. That's
the crazy thing. Because she's not just a great
hitter. She's a really good blocker. Her defense
has gotten so much better. Her serve. Not sure
why she put the spin serve away. Agreed. Not
a huge fan of her flow serve right now. The crazy
thing is, is that even though they didn't change
anything all season, except they were forced
to, they were forced to bring Pazell in when
the other left side got injured. That was the
only change. But I mean, as far as a systems
perspective, and she still almost managed to
do it single -handedly. She hit 463. 22 kills
on 41 sets and you hit 463. You can't ask. Anything
more of a player than that, in my opinion. And
she was not getting easy balls to score on. No.
She was consistently hitting six feet off the
net. Yes. In out of system situations, which
is crazy considering your whole team has been
setting her out of system all season. How are
we not getting the ball closer to the net? And
even Bayless, eight for 17, hit 353. Like those
two players. Which I thought was crazy that they.
The crowd. Yeah, anyway. The only thing. They
did, while they were in control or in the matches,
in the first two sets, they moved Babcock around
to face Slidnicki for a couple times. Their adjustments
were to put Babcock in places to make her more
effective. Not anything I could determine based
off the rest of the team. Even the game plan
was centered around moving Babcock around, which,
I mean, that's fine. You have the best player,
but you need to put... Pieces in strategy around
her. I thought there were many opportunities
where Mosher could have ran a more effective
middle or tried to push it. There's no reason
Brie Kelly should not be utilized. She is a very
good middle. She has the capabilities of scoring.
I think she had one of the highest hitting percentages
in the country last year when Fairbanks was running
the offense. She's clearly capable. There is
no reason. I feel like she was wasted. Yes, I
totally agree on that point. Passed particularly
well. I thought they were around or behind. Particularly
their passing libero. Yes. I thought the liberos
killed them in general. Both of them struggled.
Not very good. And, you know, Moser was setting
a whole bunch from at the attack line, straddling
the attack line, slightly behind. But anything
in front of the attack line, again, the middles
needed to be a threat because you got the performance
out of your star player that you needed to win.
We came back to it. Eventually, if you just lean
on one player in this sport, you're going to
run into a full team who can take care of it
and who can slow your hitter down enough to make
it impossible to win. And I think I said they
need to hold Babcock to under 25 points. She
had 22 kills. She had more than 25 points. So
what were the keys to success for A &M? You needed
to be able to run the middle. and own the middle
of the court, and they did a fantastic job on
that, in my opinion. Their middles scored efficiently.
They didn't get a ton of sets. They got more
than the Pitt middles. But here's the thing.
They were always a threat to score. Pitt's middles
had to honor them all the time because they worked
so hard to be there. Hats off to WAC. I thought
she set an amazing game. Quite frankly, they
ran overload. Sometimes they ran spread. Sometimes
they ran their middles in front 51, 61, 31. Well,
she ran with the flow sometimes and she ran against
the flow sometimes. Like, yeah, she did a really
good job and the, she was able to deliver speed.
Yes. Pretty consistently. Yeah. And you saw.
you know, they'd run the 31, they'd set the 31,
then they'd run the 31 and they'd push it a little
past to the outside hitter. Like Pitt's defense
was just out of sorts. They didn't know where
the ball was going to go because the middle was
a threat. They didn't get set on the perimeter.
They dug a lot of balls that they didn't get
good transition opportunities on because they
weren't set on defense. Like kudos to Texas A
&M. They played incredibly well. But they had
scoring threats legit from every position. The
middles were scoring well. The Nikki was scoring
well. Stowers was scoring, scoring well. But
then you also have Helmuth who isn't typically,
you know, the one you expect to score points.
But when she got the opportunities, she was putting
balls away. Perkins was official. Like they were
coming at you and could rely on players in every
single position. Absolutely. Led Nikki 14 for
31 hit 323. Stowers, 16 for 30, hit 433. Helmuth,
8 for 18, 222. And from your P2, that's good
enough. If your P2 is hitting over 200, that's
all you can ask of her. Well, and particularly
when you're getting production from several other
players. Yes, agreed. Everybody on the court
was a threat. They set Perkins. They set... Kossak
Paula, their distribution was perfect. And I
want to spend a little bit of time talking about
Jamie real quick. So he won coach of the year.
And I don't know if this is, it's intentional,
but I want to kind of point it out. He spent
a lot of time in the international game, working
on four -year cycles, developing players, preparing
for one big tournament in the Olympics. And I
find it fascinating. that with nine seniors who
have been with him majority of the whole time,
all of the sudden, and not all of a sudden, but
gradually, you get to a point where everybody's
playing well. Helmuth and Stowers, if you asked
me at the beginning of the season, not a stellar
outside core. I thought it was probably one of
their weaknesses. Well, we watched them early
in the season, and I think we were like, they're
pretty good, but... Okay. But you're not talking
about them in the top five outside cores, right?
And Stowers, in my opinion, was the best player
for Texas A &M. And I think she should probably
win player of the tournament or whatever that
award is called. MVP. MVP. She's been outstanding,
in my opinion. Jamie. And just keep in mind,
we are recording this segment before the final
is played. Jamie. has put the work in to develop
all of his players, at least who started from
the ones that we've seen. There are improvements
across the board, I would say probably other
than LaNicki. I think she's been kind of the
same. Well, we see almost the same team from
last season that lost in the regional semifinal.
You know, Helmuth was playing. Stowers obviously
wasn't playing. She was medically retired at
the time. Same middle, same setter. So we have
seen in real time the growth of this team with
the same players. And that doesn't happen by
accident. So kudos to Jamie. Given how his team
has stepped up and performed in the tournament,
I think the coach of the year is deserved, even
if it's a four -year build. They are playing
incredibly well. I love their offense. I find
it to be more of an international style offense
where they have a lot of offense in front of
their setter. They're running gaps in between
blockers. They're running, again, 51s. They're
making life very difficult. And you're not seeing
the middles running off of one foot behind, which
is what we talked about during the Nebraska match,
which Nebraska should have considered doing when
Jackson was struggling. Texas A &M isn't running
any middle behind the setter. You know, you don't
see that a ton, so it's harder to defend. So
I think that that flavor and those adjustments
really served them well. And they ran middle
all match. 19 -19 ran a middle. 21 -20 ran a
middle. And that's the thing is it doesn't necessarily
have to be like every second ball. It just needs
to be consistent. And like on Pitt's side, it
was very predictable when the pass got really
tight or when the pass was perfect. On A &M's
side, it was just... A consistent, you know,
trickle. Sometimes off the net, sometimes good
passes. Sometimes they ran Cossack Polo on like
a hybrid meter ball. Yeah. They're just to keep,
and they don't run a good back row with their
left sides. No. And so in order to do that. And
I would argue that Nicky's not even great out
of the back row. No, I agree. So that was how
they managed to own the middle of the court in
semi out of system positions was. Because Kasukpala's
physical, she can do that. You're holding. Brilliant
by them, in my opinion. Stowers, outstanding.
Kasukpala, wow. Especially, like, she was scoring
really well. Her serve, poof. Very nice. But
her blocking. She is slowing down everything.
And I love her movement patterns. Seeing what
the other team's offense is doing and watching
her, you know, decision, her movement patterns
of like fronting the middle a little bit and
reacting, her lateral movement is so efficient.
I really like her. So you talked to me a little
bit and I didn't hear this quote, but you were
telling me somebody asked Kostik Polo before
the match, how do you slow down Olivia Babcock?
And what was her response? She's like, it's not
even about Olivia Babcock for me. It's about
us. And I literally got goosebumps because I
was like, yes, if your team is taking care of
your side of the net, Olivia Babcock is going
to score her points. But if your team is working
as a unit and everybody is just doing their job,
that's all that matters. And I thought they did
an outstanding job defending Babcock. She still.
Was incredibly efficient. She's good enough.
She's going to score those points. But what I
thought was interesting was very rarely did she
score clean points. There were touches. And she
never had a one on one. Never had a one on one.
And they got slowdowns. Not all of them worked
in transition. You know, not all of them were
good opportunities, but they defended the hard
angle on her very cleanly with a solid block.
They got touches. They made her life. More difficult
than I've seen any team up to this point do that.
And I think an intangible thing that I just really
loved, aside from that comment, was just how
genuinely excited the girls looked to be playing
together on the court. And you could feel the
excitement during timeouts, how excited the coaching
staff felt. The atmosphere on the court and around
the team was one of just pure... joy and excitement
to be playing together. Jamie loves those girls.
And they love each other. It was really cool
to see. I thought serve and pass played a huge
role. Again, you watched Texas A &M was generally
passes where even if they were around the attack
line, they were just in front of it, whereas
Pitt's passing was just behind it, and that makes
enough of a difference. Especially if your setter's
not confident running the middle. while moving.
And really the only serving threat that Pitt
had, I thought, was Mosier, who's got a great
serve, but you can't only be applying pressure.
One out of six rotations? Yeah. With A &M's middles,
the threat that they made them, Pitt needed to
put more pressure on them from the service line
to make their outside hitters a little more predictable.
If they can get two blocks up, On the outside
hitters, life becomes difficult, but they just
couldn't do it. Particularly in that rotation
when it's Stowers, Lednicki, and Cossack Paul
in the furrow together. Yikes. Watch out. Who
do you pick? And I didn't see Pitt make any adjustments
other than panic switches in the third set. So
in the third set, I think they switched their
middles. They brought in Ryla Jones, you know,
and then setter only two balls. They had a left
side switch. They brought in... Gregoire. Yeah,
they brought in Gregoire who played front row
and it didn't seem purposeful. It seemed like
changing something to try and get a different
mix on the floor. Well, I love how before the
game, the announcer was saying like Dan Fisher
was like, oh, this is a new team. This is this
team is so only half of our team have been here.
Well, guess how many of A &M has been there?
Zero. So the last thing I wanted to touch on
with this match, you know, we've talked about
the players, we've talked about the strategy
is just, I don't even know if program philosophy,
but Pitt has now lost five times in a row in
the national semifinal. This was Texas A &M's
first final, you know, speak to the mindset that
you saw of the athletes and then maybe what Pitt
needs to do next year to overcome this hurdle.
I mean, you could kind of see not desperation,
but a sense of urgency from the likes of like
Olivia Babcock, who has now been there three
times in a row. And you could just see her trying
to like will the team to overcome this hurdle.
On the A &M side, it was just like, I thought
Jamie Morrison's pregame speech was like so good
because being in that position. They could potentially
have had the feeling like, do we belong here?
And he just kept reminding them like, we are
here. We are here. We're prepared. And if they
are going to make great plays, but just remember
like we earned our spot here. And I think like
kind of going back to that and just that reminder,
just let them play a little more free. Maybe
they did have the underdog mentality and just
were just like, we're just going to leave it
all out there. We're just going to go for it.
But you could see definitely a bit of tightness
on the Pitt side. Just we need to finally get
past this. Whereas it was more of a free, like
joyful appearance on the Texas A &M side. Yeah.
And I thought that that showed in the mentality
of the Texas A &M hitters. they kept swinging
for points and granted they did a great job covering
their hitters when they got blocks like recycled
i thought they were tenacious on defense but
even when things didn't go their way they were
playing to earn points no matter what especially
i thought lidnicki who got many set ending sets
and was forced to Be in compromise position,
but still go for it. She got a lot of not good
sets. I was impressed with how aggressive she
stayed. And she didn't score on a lot of really
important points, but she just kept going for
it. Two things. Talk to me about Pitt. I think
for me, it just didn't seem like they were thinking
about what it would take to get over the hump
early enough in the season. They were riding
Babcock. They did that. I just think you have
to be looking at when we play really good teams.
Babcock's not going to be enough. And I don't
know whether he talked to the middle and they
tried and Moser just wasn't willing to do it.
But I mean, I think everybody saw this coming.
We've been talking about it all season. It just
seems like they keep getting stuck in the same
place and they keep relying on Babcock. And I
know they've been here without her, but you need
to be more of a complete team. I think that's
what we're seeing in this playoff so far. Do
you think they expected to make it this far after
all the people they lost last season? Yes. You
have Olivia. You have a shot to win. I think
you need to take it like one match at a time
and they play in a very strong conference. So
it's not like they haven't beaten good teams
with this system. I think it's not just about
building so like we can win a national championship.
It's about like, let's build so we can win our
conference so we can do this. And they won their
conference without having to really change much.
It seems short -sighted to me. And it's not like
you're trying to force bad middles. I'm not disagreeing
with you. I'm like, given the personnel, like,
do you think Purdue expected to make it as far
as they did? No. I think with the personnel,
I thought it would be a challenge for them to
make it as far as they did this season. Granted,
they had a really good year. They should have
continued to evolve instead of just riding, doing
the same thing over and over again. But they
did. Yeah. I'm worried when Olivia leaves what
happens. to that program if they don't have another
stud because they're not playing team volleyball.
I'm also very curious to see what happens with
Texas A &M because they have nine seniors. What
is that culture going to look like after they
all leave and is Jamie going to be on another
four -year cycle? I agree. I think Pitt could
have done... And I don't know what their training
with their setter looks like. I think they could
have done more to get her confidence setting
the middle in compromised positions. I think
ultimately if they would have done that, I think
they could have had more success, at least not
gotten beat three straight. Agreed. But yeah,
they were riding their producer all season long.
And they ran into a team that was getting production
from all sides of the net. They were able to
slow her down enough. Okay, let's dive into the
second semifinal. Which I thought was the much
better game. Than the first one? Yes. Oh, absolutely.
I mean, it went five, so that's already a start.
Hit me with your initial thoughts. I honestly
thought Wisconsin should have won. I thought
they generally played better, in my opinion.
I agree. I thought Herbringer set a good game.
I was so impressed with Carter Booth. She's come
on real strong in the last part of the season,
during the tournament. Agreed. And Furbringer's
finding her in all kinds of different situations.
I mean, they went up 9 -2 to start. I think she
ran the middle three times. Booth was great.
She blocked well. Her leadership on the court,
all of those things, I mean, that's exactly what
you want to see from one of your leaders, senior
or not. Yeah, I mean, I think earlier in the
season, we saw Mimi Collier having to do the
most offensively. Yes. I think even last year,
one of our bigger criticisms of Wisconsin was
how little they ran the middle. Yeah, agreed.
But as they mentioned in the broadcast, Charlie's
injury, I think, made it clear to her just how
available Booth is. And since she's come back,
I think their connection has been so good to
have a middle scoring well in addition to Collier.
As I said last week, I think Vajicic had a good
tournament, so she was contributing, bringing...
Trinity shed series off the bench for Vajicic
in some circumstances to block. She was good
for a couple points. We saw Sheffield dust off
the old substitution booklet and try a few things
in the tournament. So I wonder if he was just
holding his cards all season. I mean, he obviously
listened to our podcast. It was all a... I'm
clearly kidding. So hold up. Don't get mad at
me. He decided to work for his paycheck in the
tournament instead of just sitting there and
watching or what? We're Sheffield fans, FYI.
Yeah, get your hands off that keyboard. You can
put them away. I agree with you. I think Wisconsin
was the better team. Two things I noticed. One,
O 'Brien looked nervous. Which we talked about
last week as being a possibility. Her set location
and consistency, I want to make sure I caveat
this. They weren't bad, but they weren't the
same. And I think that's an important difference
because it allows your hitters to find rhythm.
And you're not fighting it all the time if it's
always in the same spot. And I don't think she
was bad. But again, you could tell the sets were
not always in the same place, sometimes a little
bit higher. She looked tight to me. It settled
as the match went on, but definitely at the start.
And the other thing was, I thought Wisconsin
overdug too many balls. in the match as a whole.
They were in good places, but they were always
tight or slightly over the net. I think they
wasted a ton of opportunities where they should
have had good transition opportunities and didn't.
They absolutely demolished Kentucky in the first
set. Yes, it wasn't even close. It wasn't even
close. Honestly, Delay looked on a different
planet to me. Agreed. She did not have a good
match. Did not have a good match. Could not find
her rhythm. Just did not look herself. We talked
about this very early with Kentucky in the season
was O 'Brien, in my opinion, got the job because
she could set Hudson better than their other
setter, who I thought connected with DeLay better.
So I don't think O 'Brien and DeLay had the best
connection at the best of times. And when O 'Brien
starts to struggle. Was that the case or was
it the opposite? I'm pretty sure. I do remember
us talking about one setter looked more comfortable
with one and then O 'Brien looked better with
the other. Almost positive it was O 'Brien with
Hudson because it allowed Hudson to hit the line
shot and her balls got out a little bit further
if I'm remembering correctly. But it was that
combination that allowed O 'Brien to start along
with being a freshman in my opinion. I thought
Wisconsin's serving strategy was very interesting.
Not a tactic that we've seen many teams take
with Kentucky. They were serving the back row
not throughout the whole match. But it definitely
became glaringly obvious to me at one point.
They were serving the back row left side short.
I just think it's a really good strategy. I was
like, this is a really good idea. Because you
see so many teams try to bury the front row passing
left side. Not really serve them short. And they
can still get out to attack. You still have the
back row. But by bringing the back row. left
side short it's not just a lateral move to get
your approach anymore you have to move back up
and so they were completely taking the back row
left side option out which was great i think
they were up six one in blocks at the beginning
of that match and that was a direct result of
not having to worry about the pipe yeah now it's
just hey middle maybe kentucky doesn't run a
ton of middle and o 'brien again i think as she
got nervous ran the middle less and less And
so they were loading up on the outside and having
a ton of success with that. The other thing I
will say is Kentucky's transition setting was
atrocious. Oh my gosh. I was like literally taking
mental stats all match. You guys know how I feel
about Molly Tuzzo's jump setting. I wasn't only
talking about Molly, but go ahead. Well, I have
certain players that catch strays every episode.
She is one of them in the setting department.
Every single time she jump set, it resulted in
the hitter having to tip. If it wasn't 100%.
It was flipping close. 80, 85 % of the time.
I was going to say 97%. I'm kidding. But it was
really high. Like when she bumps it, good delivery.
When her feet were on the ground, good delivery.
When she jumpsets, it resulted in a tip every
single time. And the announcer kept being like,
great setter. And I'm like, yeah, when her feet
are on the ground. Anyway. I'm going to point
this out, though. She's one of those players.
She looks. Great jump setting. Like, it looks
pretty. It's flashy. You know what? Let's look
at the result. Yeah. It's like, you know, the
people who dive all over the court. We've been
over this before. I'm not going to say it again.
Now, I thought in the second set, Kentucky made
some interesting adjustments. They started blocking
Booth double in the middle, which I thought was
a good adjustment. Well, especially because the
Wisconsin right side is their weakest attacker,
in my opinion. Correct. If Vajic is playing well,
which she was. Yes, yes. And they started, Mimi
Collier likes to do that deep roll shot when
she's not feeling comfortable as an attacker.
And they were sliding over and getting opportunities
on her for that. So that was good. And in my
opinion, Wisconsin lost the match in the second
set. Okay. Because they were up and playing well.
At 2019, Mimi had a back row error. At 2020,
Furbringer. goes to the right side for whatever
reason, and probably should have gone to the
front court left side. And Kentucky went on a
6 -0 run at the end of that set. I think if Wisconsin
pulls that set off, they end up winning that
match. And there was a couple decision -making
issues, in my opinion, a couple execution issues.
Kentucky made a couple plays. I will say Hudson
found a way to score with what I thought were
bad sets, and they just started rolling from
there. To me, that set two was the key. I don't
even think that they started rolling because
the sets that Wisconsin won were, I think, much
more decisive than the Kentucky sets. I will
give it to Kentucky, though. They kept clawing
their way out of difficulties, which is the mark
of a really good team. I think Hudson, yes, started
slow. I think she gradually found her way. delay
for me was floundering the whole match she was
better in the at the end of the fourth and the
fifth set i actually thought that's why they
won well they were up like what eight two in
the fifth and then wisconsin brought it back
top to bottom i think wisconsin played better
and deserved to win kentucky just found a way
i think that's the hallmark of this team there
they were gritty hudson for the most part refuses
to lose she keeps going and they gave delay a
chance to score some points down the stretch
when she needed to she was not good but when
the set was there on the line she stayed with
it after not playing well to score points when
they needed her to and stayed engaged with her
teammates and the thing there is a something
that came up at 14 13 in the fifth and there
was a timeout called and coming back the sideline
reporter said That delay looked at Cassie O 'Brien
at that point and was like, this is fun. Hell
yeah, it's fun. Tight matches are fun, especially
when like you have everything on the line and
she was not playing well that match, but she
had the wherewithal to know that her freshman
setter was probably going through it. She was
going through it, but she knew that she had to
like. lighten the moment yeah lighten the moment
and just like get her give her some perspective
because like yeah playing in those high pressure
environments when it's so tight is fun and I
think that just speaks to like her leadership
I thought defensively she was fine and I thought
she passed well so even though the offensive
portion of her game was not good you can tell
when a player stays engaged because the other
skills don't necessarily go down the tank either
So I thought to her credit, she did a good job
of that. But I want to read you these stats.
Tell me if you think these stats are good enough
to win a match. Your middle goes 21 for 30, hits
633. Your P2 hits 286. Your P1 hits 348. And
your second middle hits 455. 100 % yes. Those
are Wisconsin's numbers on that match. That's
a performance that you should win. You know,
I would say it's disappointing for Wisconsin
to have put up those numbers and for those individual
performances to be good and to still not be able
to pull it out. I mean, that's sport, but they
played well individually and as a team. And Mimi
Collier, I'm sorry, she's good. Yes. She was,
she scores and keeps scoring and everybody in
the gym knows where the ball is going and she
keeps scoring and is ice cold too. match point
she got set on a lot of Kentucky match points
and she was putting the ball away like this is
what we're talking about about as far as like
a go -to hitter well and you look at it I actually
thought Thigpen played a key role in in their
winning because if you look at Kentucky's numbers
Hudson played really well she was 29 for 55 she
hit 455 that's outstanding and that's in like
in addition to my sentiment of her starting Slower
than usual. So she was really good down the stretch.
But delay hit 160. Carr hit 125. Thigpen hit
300. She didn't get a ton of sets, but she scored
when needed to. And that's what you need. All
the focus is on Hudson and delay. In a moment
where one of those players falters, which happened,
you need somebody else to step up, and she did.
To me, the telling piece was down the line. Kentucky
had three aces and nine service errors. Wisconsin
had no service aces and 14 service errors, which
isn't an outrageous number. But while they did
have a serving strategy, which I agreed with,
at some point you also have to put them under
a little bit of pressure. I think the serving
strategy got stale. I wasn't going to say anything,
but that might have been. No, my heart broke
for that girl because she was probably terrified,
first of all. to go in in that environment as
a freshman. And then for that to happen, the
whole crowd was like, Ooh, my heart broke for
her. That's on the ESPN top 10 list forever for
her. That's, that's rough. Yeah. If you don't
know, go back. Don't go back and watch it. I'm
sure it's on YouTube. I think it was a word low.
Adam's like, here's the timestamp. Check it out.
I mean, I. She caught her toe on the floor. He's
like, I wasn't going to talk about it, but I
jotted down the timestamp in case anybody's interested.
I actually had to go back on the broadcast and
watch it again. I was like, what just happened
there? I've seen it on the beach a lot, actually.
Yeah, the sand shark is a real thing. I've never
seen the cork shark. Came out of that Teraflex
looking for some ankles. I thoroughly enjoyed
watching that match. I thought... There were
interesting adjustments back and forth. It was
a good coach's battle. It was a good player's
battle. You saw the players for the most part
perform, you know, other than delay, but she
played well at the end. I do think as a team,
you know, with Booth playing the way she did
in the middle, Egan and Vajicic stepping up,
I think Wisconsin, if there was a desirable meter
in terms of watching volleyball, that Wisconsin
should have won that match and Kentucky actually.
squeaked it out you know off of Hudson's play
for the most part all right our last match of
the season weekend final four however you want
to cut it was Texas disappointing well Texas
A &M versus Kentucky I mean unless you're Texas
A &M that was not a good volleyball match no
from an entertainment perspective I found it
very underwhelming I was really disappointed
In the Kentucky team that showed up, I had them
winning my whole bracket, okay? And then they
go and get swept. Give me a break. I mean, no
disrespect in this comment, but when Thigpen
is your best player, you're probably not going
to win. And she, to her credit, was the best
one for Kentucky. Well, it was just like they
were so dominant for like 15 points, and then
it was like they disappeared, and A &M was like,
yeah, we're just going to steamroll you. It was
honestly embarrassing. Once Texas A &M beat Nebraska
and gained confidence, I think they truly believed
they could win. And they were really hard to
stop after that. Now, they were a little blinded
by the lights at the beginning of that first
set, I thought. But man, Jamie did a good job
of righting the ship and bringing them back in.
I think they were down 13 -7 to Kentucky. And
they just did not give up. They kept playing.
And I think if I had to, we talked about this
during the match. I think Texas A &M played to
win. They were aggressive. And it looked, specifically
from the left sides for Kentucky, like they were
playing tight. Not to lose. Not to lose. Big
difference. But Texas A &M did that, I thought,
they did that to Nebraska. They did that to Louisville.
They did it to Kentucky. They did it to Pitt.
You know, they were fearless this whole tournament.
And it paid off. That's what it takes to win,
though. You need to go out and take the match.
You need to swing to score. Not to, like, not
make mistakes. Not to, oh, hopefully this team
will cool down and we'll be able to just, like,
be comfortable. No, winning is uncomfortable.
You need to get out of your comfort zone. And
I think that Texas A &M came out and they decided
they were going to. take it they were going to
swing to score and Kentucky didn't and particularly
the two left sides which I'm sorry how do you
have such a dominant season the best left side
duo in the country and you come out and you put
that performance together what to me the difference
between the semifinals and the finals is that
in the semifinals Hudson hit over 400 and in
the finals she hit 200. Like, Delay was not good
all Final Four, offensively. Delay hit 0 -36
in this match. But she didn't pass well either.
No. And by the time the third set rolled around,
Kentucky didn't believe they were going to win.
Like, that first... You could see the desperation
and the frustration on certain faces. Yes. I
mean, the first couple points in the third set,
I don't think Lizzie Carr didn't jump for a set
that went over her head. Yes. Eva Hudson went
to set a ball that she should have been hitting,
and then it landed on the floor. Eva was visibly
frustrated. But I think like what you said about
Lizzie Carr, O 'Brien got pulled toward the 10
foot line, set a 31 or a B set or however you
want to call it. Lizzie Carr just didn't even
approach and jump. That for me is, speaks volumes
to the lack of focus, the lack of engagement.
And then a service coming mid court, she sticks
her arms out and tries to pass it. I'm like,
okay, the, The wheels are gone. They're on a
different planet at this point. Kentucky just
didn't know what to do. And again, I thought
O 'Brien set pretty much the same as she did
in the semi. It wasn't consistent. It wasn't
her best that we've seen from her all season.
But it wasn't bad enough for this to be the outcome
from the hitters. The difference to me was in
the semifinal, I thought Hudson specifically
was still swinging to score. She was still being
aggressive on balls she was uncomfortable with
in the... Finals, it didn't happen. And interestingly,
the reason I think Kentucky went up so big in
the beginning of the first set is they were not
comfortable and they ended up rolling and tipping
a whole bunch of balls into the middle of the
court. Now, A &M planned for a perimeter defense
because they're both big swingers. And so those
tips and rolls scored early and often at the
beginning of that set. A &M realized that they
were going to keep doing that, whether because
they couldn't hit it or that was all they had
left to them. They made an adjustment, and Kentucky
never started swinging to reset the defense,
and they just got transition opportunity after
transition opportunity. I'm definitely not laying
this all at O 'Brien's feet because Kentucky
didn't pass well either. When you have a young
setter, you need to make life easy for them,
and they didn't. It's not like A &M's serving
strategy was out of this world. They were just...
Serving the sideline of the passing left side.
Yeah. Period. And they weren't executing. It
was disappointing because I was expecting a knockdown
drag out fight. I expected a great match. Every
set overtime, big hits, wild digs, massive blocks,
lead changes. I had huge expectations for this
match. And like A &M has been building to that.
We saw like in the regionals, they were up big
in several sets, like kind of bleeding out on
the court, giving up those leads. And so they
going through that, those moments in the regional,
they cleaned that up in the final four. We didn't
see A &M go up huge in certain sets and just
like completely blow it the way that we saw in
the regional. And I think that speaks to the
belief that they developed, the confidence they
developed in winning those tight regionals matches.
And we saw a much more calm, confident team that
was executing at a very high level and just going
for it. Whereas on Kentucky side, like Eva Hudson,
you could see her arm as she's swinging. It was.
hesitant it was a little tentative she wasn't
putting a full swing together and I'm sorry in
a moment like that you need to look at yourself
and you need to be okay being like I am leaving
nothing like how do I want to feel when this
is over and the answer should be I want no regrets
I am going for it if I go down I am going down
swinging hard and giving it everything I've gotten
I watching that there was hesitation Totally.
And this is really interesting because A &M managed
to isolate the best players on opposing teams.
There were times, and we talked about this in
other matches, Eva Hudson would get a kill and
she was so in her own head, she would just walk
back and not engage with her team. Again, we
saw that happen in several other situations and
A &M just does that to you. Their block is disciplined.
Their defense is disciplined. They make it. Hard
to score. You start thinking about, man, what
do I have to do to be able to make that swing?
And you get uncomfortable. You miss out the sideline.
Well, then they finally get a ball back and then
they miss the serve. Yeah. Like A &M put together
a great performance and. They were able to apply
pressure to their opponents consistently in a
way I don't think many of those top teams had
ever experienced. They didn't back down. They
came to fight and they did. And I'm just like,
they're. Ball control was good. The way that
WAC was running that offense, it was fast, but
incorporating the middles like we saw in the
semifinal match against Pitt. It's just they
were able to score and find ways and be aggressive
because of the speed they were running. The ball
control allowed them to run that with speed.
Their block, the way that they're able to read
the play and move laterally and just the discipline
that they have in reading the situation. They
got so many slowdowns. Just, yeah. And their
service pressure. Just top to bottom, they did
a great job. They were a championship caliber
group. I don't think they have a standout. Storrs
is good. Lednicki is good. Kosakpola is good.
But you're not picking any of those players,
probably even in the top five for their position.
Well, and again, we see one A &M player got first
team All -American. Two got second. Yeah. It
was just a great team performance. Coaching staff
wise, Jamie did a great job. Game plan. But even
his pregame speeches are just like so on point.
A team like that, they need to understand that
you believe in them and that they belong there.
Listening to what he was saying to them before
the match, it's like they have created a team
identity and a culture together that I just think
set them apart. from the other teams that have
the quote -unquote like blue blood athletes.
Well, I thought it was really cool. I didn't
know this ahead of time. Before those players
played club together. And the assistant coach
was the club coach. From 15U. Just like the story.
And I am not like somebody who really. Sentimental.
I'm not sentimental. I don't really care about
that stuff. I'm just like, let's see. may the
best man win. You know, like I don't really get
wrapped up in the story. That aspect of them
playing club together and then all of them going
to A &M with the same coach and like just going
through that. Like I still have really good relationships
with girls that I played club with. If I had
had the opportunity to play college with them
too, like that is so special. But then in addition
to that, like the story of Kausak Paula, like
choosing a program where she could help make
them good again. Yeah. Not every athlete, myself
included, would make that same choice. Do you
know what I mean? Stowers coming back. Stowers
story. Are you kidding me? You're medically retired.
You don't think you can ever play again. And
then you come back. And you're MVP. Are you joking?
Come on. That team made you want to cheer for
them. And you guys, you know me. I do not cheer
for the underdog. I'm not sentimental. I don't
care about stuff like that. But this team just,
like, got under my skin. And the Grinch, her
heart is beating, okay? Merry Christmas. Yeah,
I don't know. Again, there's not a lot of volleyball
to talk about because it just wasn't. It was
one -sided. Congrats to Texas A &M across the
board, the staff. I think I cried. I got full
body chills several times. I think I cried. Yes.
I am going to watch How the Grinch Stole Christmas
because I think that this is perfectly timed.
Adam doesn't have anything to say. Sometimes
I say things and he's just like, you're actually
insane. Like, I'm dumbfounded. This seemed like
the perfect wrap. Congrats to Texas A &M. That
was an incredible run. It was so fun to watch.
I wish the final would have been better, but,
you know, it is what it is. All right, everybody,
we are back with listener questions this week.
It's hard to pick them, okay? We have so many
questions. So let's start with this one. What
do you guys think of Kirsten Simon from Wisconsin,
the libero? I feel like when I watch Wisconsin,
I rarely notice her, which Adam says is good,
but I never see her do anything that stands out
in a good way. A few times I do notice her if
she's aced slash overpasses, though that does
seem to be rare. I thought she was fine in their
semifinal. She's not a standout in any way for
me yet. I think it's impressive that you have
a freshman taking up that role and passing. I
also had a freshman last year in Lola Schumacher.
Well, we won't talk about that. I think there's
potential there. I think defensively, she looks
like she's in. good position i think she moves
well i think she passes pretty well i don't have
a strong opinion which means she did her job
quite frankly she's not a black hole like i don't
watch her and like pinpoint things that i'm like
wow massive red flag Yeah. And there weren't
places like you were totally out of position
or you should have dug that ball and didn't.
I think there were a couple that went over the
net that I was like, yeah, you probably should
have had that one. I think she's fine. She's
not like on all American level libero for me,
but she's not costing Wisconsin games. Let's
put it that way. I don't think as a freshman,
you could ask for anything more. Like she did
a great job. There's a good foundation there.
And I think she has the potential to be, you
know, very good in two years if she keeps. Getting
better. No red flags. Which is a win over here,
okay, you guys? Okay, question two. Can you guys
do a quick comparison of some of the major setters
in the NCAA? I'd like to understand why Swindle
is so bad and why Izzy Stark is considered to
be the best or one of the best. You guys seem
kind of up and down about Bergen. I'd like to
hear your thoughts. Okay, the setting position,
I think, is one that is a very difficult position
to quantify with stats. We hear all about hitter
efficiency and team hitting percentage and all
of those kind of things. I don't really think
those matter for setters. They matter, but they're
far less indicative of success than like a hitting
percentage for a hitter, in my opinion. Yeah,
I feel like when I am evaluating setters, it's
a lot of like, not necessarily intangible things,
but just things that I observe in the moment,
like that you said. stats don't really pick up
it's like how are you moving to the ball how
good are you at like winning those or making
good sets on like those tight passes or those
tight plays when what is your decision making
like on when to dump and like where to put the
ball how do you deliver the ball out of system
what's your tempo like your consistency so there's
like so many pieces that I am personally looking
at And so I think a reason why Swindle catches
so many strays from me is that her footwork,
she rarely squares up when she has to move, which
completely takes hitters out of her vision. And
so she's just going on feel. So her set location
is pretty inconsistent. And she barely runs the
middle because she's not putting herself in a
position to see the middle. Those are my issues
with her. What do I think makes Izzy Stark so
good? She can deliver the ball with precision
and consistency from anywhere on the court. Her
decision making and aggression when she's going
on to. I think is really good. She puts up a
good block. She runs a balanced offense, knows
who to set when, and it's like her hitters always
look in rhythm. Why I put Bergen in the middle
of that is like her out -of -system setting is
very inconsistent. The tempos change, the location
changes. I think she runs a very good offense
in system, but like... It's things like that
that I kind of look at. I agree 100 % with all
of the things you said. I think a couple of the
things I look at is do they look the same when
they're setting all positions? So how much are
you giving away where you're going? Do you have
tendencies? Are you square to the same spot?
Do you take the ball in the same spot above your
head regardless of who you're setting? Another
big thing for me is do you own the middle of
the court? Do you find a way to hold the middle
blocker, whether it's with your middle blocker
or whether it's a pipe ball or whether it's with
a dump? All of those things, owning the middle
of the court is so important. And it's that setting
feel of knowing when that middle's cheating on
you, when you have to get to hold them, who's
open, who's hot. And I was actually, we had some
questions about, hey, can you find some video
about people, you know, setting balls that you're
talking about? And if you want, go back and watch
Wisconsin play in the semifinal. And there were
a bunch of out -of -system balls in the fourth
and fifth set, I believe, that Furbringer set.
in system to Mimi Collier. That's exactly what
I'm talking about. She gets there, she gets square,
she delivers an out -of -system ball, but there's
tempo for Mimi, and it's in the same location.
I think Furbringer has improved a lot. I would
put her and Izzy Stark definitely up there. Not
every setter completely turns their head to look
across the net to try to isolate their hitters,
but she has... and is starting to do that to
get her hitters one -on -one. Like there's just,
yeah, she is very good. I think Stucky before
she got injured would have been on that list
for me. Yeah, she's not moving as well anymore
for obvious reasons, but. I think Maddie Wack
did an outstanding job in this run in terms of
getting her middles involved, in terms of running
tempo and making decisions and isolating hitters.
Like she clearly. I like Cabello too. She does
a good job. She's very good offensively. Sometimes
her location is a little inconsistent, which
I think doesn't put her at the stark level. Parks
at Stanford I think is going to be very good.
Like a step down. O 'Brien made strides. O 'Brien
doesn't strike me as being a natural setter.
Like there's some people you watch and you're
like, yes, you're a setter. Well, I think she
was a hitter too, so that makes sense. That doesn't
shock me, but she's coming along. I think there's
potential there. Those would be the ones that
kind of come to mind. Okay, question three. How
difficult is it to change positions mainly within
hitters? For example, could a good offensive
middle succeed as an opposite? Would a good pin
hitter be likely to find success at the other
pin or as a middle? Or are the roles too distinct
and specialized at that level to allow players
to swap? I think if you're a pin going to the
middle, not going to happen. Blocking -wise,
you'd be... spinning like a top. I think the
most logical transition is middle to opposite
because opposites don't pass or anything. I mean,
I went from a middle to an opposite to a left
side, so it's possible. I won't say I was great
at any of them, but I did play all of those positions
at a college level. I guess not middle. I was
middle in club. There's just different things
to do. If your fundamentals are good. You know,
if your eye work is good from blocking, you can
switch positions. If you have good feet to ball,
you can hit on either pin. You know, there are
some nuances that you can pick up. Passing is
the biggest one. Like, can you learn how to pass?
And then, you know, moving to the middle, it
just doesn't happen because the outside blockers
don't move laterally as well as the middles generally.
That takes a lot of practice and a lot of discipline.
But if we're talking straight offense, I think
given enough time to work on the timing and stuff,
like, it can happen. And we see at the high level,
oftentimes like in not oftentimes but in college
we are like we've heard oh she played middle
last year now she's playing outside or she's
going wherever her team needs her like if we're
looking straight offense it is possible totally
when you add in those other skills not so much
and some people generally have good body control
and good like hand -eye coordination you can
learn how to pass doesn't work for everybody
but question is a four four So this question
pertains to video challenges. And when a coach
calls a challenge, the down official cannot come
up with conclusive evidence for or against. And
then the coach loses their challenge. So the
question is, if the video quality is poor and
the ref is not able to answer the yes or no question.
Do you feel the coach should get their challenge
back? I said this to Sarah right when it happened.
If you're telling me you can't get the answer
to what I'm challenging, I should 100 % get my
challenge back. I think that's absolutely ridiculous.
I kind of feel the same way. Yeah. Like I made
the challenge and you can't figure it out and
I'm being penalized for it. That's brutal. Brutal.
Yeah. Well, okay. So here's another piece that
we kind of discussed. How do you feel? We saw
this in the Pitt -Texas A &M game. Dan Fisher
challenged that there was a touch. In actuality,
the ball landed in. So in the course of evaluating
the play, the ref looked at the touch and if
the ball landed in. And I was like, well, to
maintain the integrity of the sport, like, yeah,
Pitt should get that point. The ball was in.
And you were like, she should not have looked
if the ball was in. He challenged the wrong thing.
He should lose his challenge anyway. And fine,
Pitt can get the point. Okay. I didn't say that
they shouldn't look at the outer end. I think
you want to get the call right. I agree with
you on that 100%. So you thought that they should
have just gotten the point, but then he should
have lost his challenge because he challenged
the wrong thing. Yeah, if you challenge the wrong
thing, that means you're throwing darts at the
dartboard. You're hoping that something happened.
A challenge is one thing, but check all five
options just to be safe. I'm 100 % advocate for
making the right call. If you challenge the wrong
thing and your challenge is wrong, in my opinion,
you should lose your challenge. You can gain
the point. That's fine. But technically, your
challenge was incorrect. You just got lucky.
That's how I would. Okay, let us know what you
guys think about this. But the one. Or if it's
inconclusive and they can't find evidence, I
do think they should get their challenge back.
Totally agree with that. Okay, question five.
I'm wondering if you think that Texas A &M has
the money or program appeal to bring in Izzy
Stark or another big name player from the transfer
portal. Seems like all the players love the program,
but since they aren't a traditional blue -blooded
program, I wasn't sure if they'd be able to replace
all their graduating talent. they might have
some appeal. No, I'm just, they are graduating
a ton of people, which makes me question the
future a little bit, but I can't speak to how
much money they have. I found out. I've got a
big football program. Like I feel like this athletic
department for sure has money. Yes. Whether they
get to spend it on volleyball, who knows? I think
that Jamie has, he developed those players and
he made them better. And I think for a lot of
players, That probably holds some weight. If
you want to play internationally, the fact that
he's done that, I think draws you to him and
that program. I think the girls genuinely liked
playing for him. That's the impression that I
got. So that's also a positive. I'm hoping he
doesn't go massive dumpster diving in the portal
because I just, I like the development that he'd
done. I hope that the young kids that he has,
he's developed and they're stepping into play.
I think it would be cool if that was kind of
his MO. So you don't want him to go into the
portal? I don't. You guys know how I feel about
the portal, period. I don't like when people
do it. But to answer the question, I feel like
it will take one big -name player to kind of
do it, and then others would probably be more
likely to follow. And I don't know. I haven't
seen the players. Right off the bat, I'm skeptical
because they are losing so many players, so many
of the people who actually were on the floor.
They still have Stowers, though. And she was
very good. Who's going to give the ball to Stowers?
You don't know what kind of young players you
had. He took those kids for four years and built
them into winners. Are they going to win next
year? Probably not. But does he have faith in
his development of the athletes that he has?
We'll find out. I do think it will be a desirable
place to go for a certain type of bullshit. Do
you think Izzy Stark would consider going there?
No, I don't think there's enough pieces. There
we go. All right. How much do you blame the Nebraska
coaching staff for the loss against Texas A &M?
All right. Well, I'm going to get, do you want
to go first or you want me to go first? Go for
it. My answer is probably not going to be popular,
but. Adam never has an unpopular answer. And
even if Adam gives an unpopular answer, it somehow
happens to land on my shoulders. I don't put
a ton of weight on the coaching staff's loss
on this one. And here's why. Maybe you could
have gotten Jackson going a little bit more.
Maybe you could have run her in front of the
setter, trying to find a way to get her going.
That was one thing. But they didn't lose that
match because of X's and O's, I don't think.
The question is, what else could they have done?
And I think about, you know, at the end of the
day, you had a bunch of players on Nebraska who,
in my opinion, were not able to handle the moment.
put a product on the floor that they are accustomed
to putting on the floor all year. I think for
Danny and company, it's a really tough situation
because you're coming in. It's your first year
with the program. None of these are your athletes.
And I think it's really hard to change culture
when you're winning. Like, what are you supposed
to do? Look at players and go, hey, that's not
good enough. We've won 37 sets in a row. I think
that's very challenging. For me, if I look at
the identity of her Louisville programs, they
were scrappy. They were fighters. They were gritty.
I wouldn't use any of those words to describe
the Nebraska program. I think Dani will bring
Nebraska a little more into that realm because
I think that's who she is, but she hasn't had
a chance to do it. I think after this loss, now
she has the authority to start molding the program
in her own image. That's my take. Could you walk
through your guys' overall thoughts on Emma Halter
and compare her to some of the other libs? Some
friends and I think she's underrated. Her out
-of -system sets seem to be some of the best
in the country. What do you think about her hands?
What holds her back from getting All -American
awards? Well, the reason she doesn't get any
awards is because she's in a blue libero. And
the liberos never get awards. Libero of the year?
Oh. I thought we were talking All -Americans.
No, like Lexi Rodriguez was an All -American
four times in a row. I know. Like we already,
who were the Liberos? We went over. It was like
Tuzzo, Sands, and the Van Gorp. I think, again,
I think Emma Halter is fine. I think that she
passes pretty well. I will agree. Her hands are
good. She sets better than Swindle. Best setter
on Texas's team, for sure. Now we're just being
mean. No, but I'm being serious. I think her
hands are better than a lot of liberos. She's
in the NCAA. Her setting is good. I would say
yes. She's an elite level setter compared to
her peers. Reads and plays outside of balls that
she's quote unquote expected to dig. So I would
say that's probably one area where she needs
to get better. Liberos who want awards need to
be spectacular defensively. That's what gets
you noticed, I would say. passing wise, I think
she's fine. I would want to see her take a little
more court, like alleviate some of the pressure
on your outside hitters. I think if she could
do those two things, she would become very, very
good. All right. You've talked about Babcock
in LA 2028, but does a Fennec Cossack Paula have
a chance? She's looked incredible this tournament,
and I'd love to hear your thoughts on her chances
for a successful international career. There
is a large part of me that just wants to say
yes because I was so impressed with how she played.
She is an outstanding blocker. And I've said
this like last week watching. I was saying it
this week probably 17 times. She's 6 '2". If
she was four inches taller, I would sit here
and tell you she's a lock. I'm not of the middles
that I've seen this season. grew to have so much
respect for her watching the last few weeks.
I, and even though Andy Jackson did not have
a good last match, like Andy Jackson and a fan
of classic Paula are my favorite NCAA middles
right now. Like those two are the ones that have
the most potential. It's just with the size difference
for her, you're just in the air a little bit
longer. If you have to bite on a middle and get
outside and the sets are a little bit faster
and you're just a little bit slower. Cause you,
You have to get up to do those things. Now, I'm
not saying you can't overcome those things. She
would have to be incredibly disciplined, incredibly
fast. And the thing he's talking about is like
the time it takes for your hands to cross the
plane of the net. We're not saying she can't
jump. She jumps very well. But like a 6 '6 girl
with her hands up, it's like a toe raise to get
the hands over the net. You know what I mean?
As opposed to a 6 '2 girl, it's that distance.
that extra distance that needs to be covered.
Think about if you have to soft block a middle,
the 6 '6 girl can kind of reach and hop and then
still get outside. She has to leave the ground
to do that and then move over. And those seconds
are precious in terms of closing a block. I think
she'll get a look for sure at that size internationally.
It's just really tough. Okay, our last question
of the day. Do you think Stowers has international
potential assuming her health won't hinder her?
That girl was going for it in system, out of
system. Her passing was decent. Will she have
a setter who's able to run fast enough to kind
of put her in a good position? Probably. She
was hitting. She was going for it against. I
loved her mentality. The mentality of an international
player is there. I think her passing will need
to be better. I'm not sure she can be your P1.
Oh yeah. So that means you've got to be incredibly
good defensively, a very sound passer. And if
she can do those two things with that mentality
as a hitter, I think, yes, let's not get crazy
here, but like a Jordan Larson, like if you can
be good in the back row, your ball control is
good, but you can find ways to chip in, you know,
eight to 10 points offensively in an international
match. I think that's the role that she could
be in. but she's got some ball control work to
do. She jumps really well, though. 100%. We ran
through a bunch of questions today. I just wanted
to knock some NCAA ones out now that the season's
over. We're not going to stop answering NCAA
questions, but we definitely enjoyed seeing what
you guys had to ask this week. All right, so
looking forward to this week, you should be enjoying
Christmas and the holidays if you celebrate,
sipping on some eggnog, and we will be taking
the week off, so there's nothing to watch. There's
European club and other things if you have FIVB
TV, but yeah, we will be taking the week off.
So we'll see you the following week. After that,
we will be looking at MLV. We've got some exciting
things we think to share with you there. So that's
a little bit of a teaser. We're also going to
get into the transfer portal. We'll kind of look
at. Some teams, winners, losers of that. There's
a lot happening. Yeah, moving into next week
or the next episode. So we'll let that simmer
for a little bit so we can bring you some comprehensive
updates in that regard. But enjoy the week and
we'll see you in January. That concludes this
week's episode of Volley Talk. There's always
something shaking in the volleyball world, and
we hope you enjoyed this little fix. Be sure
to follow the show so you don't miss any updates,
and we'd be so grateful if you would leave us
a five -star review. You can also find us on
Instagram at volleytalk underscore podcast. If
you have a topic you'd like us to discuss, reach
out to us on Instagram or at info at sarahpavin
.com. Thanks so much for joining us. We'll see
you in a couple weeks. Happy holidays, everybody.
And Happy New Year.