Nebraska Is The Only Remaining Unbeaten NCAA Team, Defensive Systems 101

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. Things got a little messy this week. We
had a Halloween week. Let me tell you. Trick
or treat. Mostly tricks. Mostly tricks. For those
of you who've been waiting for us to discuss
the top teams, wait no longer. Here we go. We
are diving in this week. I hope you guys are
excited. They haven't really been challenged
and the games have been kind of boring, which
is why we haven't talked about them. But you're
welcome. We are going to dive in to Nebraska
and Texas later in the episode. And speaking
of tricks, the Big 12, namely Iowa State, heard
our episode last week and were like, you don't
know anything. So the Big 12 just kind of clapped
back at us. And is as messy as ever. That's fun.
We are very excited to dive in to all this mess
and not mess. Get ready for our unfiltered opinions.
We know that's why you tune in. So let's get
started. For some weekly highlights. And there
were a few. Before we dive in, there were some
follow -up questions from our offensive segment
last week. Yes. Hit me with the questions. What
does tight mean on a set? Intuitively, I assume
that means it's too close to the net, but I would
love a concrete definition. Same with a ball
that trails off the net. So I think there's two
things you can say about a tight set. One is
if you can't swing through the ball and finish
your swing without going onto the net, that's
too tight. So your arm swing connects the ball
and then generally comes down beside your body.
If you have to stop at the top for fear of hitting
the net, that's definitely too tight. That's
not necessarily a practical definition because
the ball can still be tight and that's not the
case, but that's how you know for sure. What
about as a hitter, what would you say? If you're
extending forward to try to reach the ball, if
you feel like the set is in the blocker's hands
and you can't make a full swinging motion, those
are tight. Trailing off the net, as a viewer,
you can tell that this is happening. The attacker
has to slow down their approach. If they're hitting
near the attack line or not near the net, or
if their body looks like it's in front of the
ball, that often means that the set has trailed
off the net. And a lot of volleyball is watched
from the side. So you can actually see the path
of the ball as it leaves the setter's hands.
And sometimes you can see that it kind of veers
backward or toward the net. Second question was,
I would love you to explain a bit about the volleyball
plays you were talking about last week, like
a 31, a 51. I feel like it has to do with what
slots the players are in, but a clarification
if possible. So this is a good question. If you
haven't seen a volleyball breakdown, you start
on the left side of the court and you'll see
a lot of people number the court. one through
nine so nine different segments starting again
at the left side pin and moving all the way to
the right side pin nine equal quadrants and then
people will also go height at the antenna so
you know one would be you know very low very
fast the two would be somewhere in the middle
and the three would be kind of top of the antenna
then you can build a whole setting paradigm on
top of those numbers you don't normally see this
for outside hitters you use it mostly with middles
which is what the 31 and the 51 refer to so the
31 is always in front of the setter generally
kind of in between position three and four and
it's a one tempo, so it's low and very fast.
So that's the ball that you see the middle go
far from the setter, and it shoots across the
net in between the middle and right side blockers
of the other team. And that's always the goal.
You're trying to run that set in between those
two blockers. The 51 is generally right in the
middle of the court, a little bit closer to the
two side, but it's always on top of the setter.
So the middle is coming right to the setter.
It's a quick set, and it's right in front. The
other one you will hear is a 61, which is very
close to the setter, but just behind them. And
so those are all your first tempo middle attacks
in relation to where they are on the net. You'll
also hear some people use letters to describe
the middle attacks, but for a 101 segment, the
numbers are more scientific and systemic in how
they're describing it. Those were a couple follow
-up questions. We love them. Keep them coming.
So if you want clarification on anything we've
brought up in previous episodes, hit us up. We
are more than happy to answer them. But as far
as some highlights, Kelsey Cook and Justine Wong
-Arantes are pregnant. Congratulations. Do you
think this is the end of their either A, professional
career, or B... national team career, or do you
think they timed this out to come back and play
in LA? I can't say. We don't expect you to know.
I'm just asking what your gut is. The timing
leaves the door open should they choose to want
to play again. I think they'll continue to play
in love because it's convenient. They can go
home at night to their family. They can live
in the US. I'm sure Love can arrange it so that
they're on a team as close to support as possible.
I bet they'll continue to play Love national
team. Speaking from experience, things change
real quick when you have a baby. And I know that
I would not personally want to travel and be
gone for weeks at a time. That is just me. I
know everybody's different, but it is a huge
responsibility. I think I could see Justine coming
back before Kelsey. So congrats to them. That's
very exciting. Okay, rankings. Things kind of
settled down this week. We saw in a ranking perspective.
Okay. And by this week, I mean the rankings last
week. But there were only a couple decent size
movers. We had TCU go down to 13 from 10. Fair.
They had a rough week. Last week and Florida
entered the top 25. Deserved. I think they're
a good team. A little inconsistent, but they
should be up there. Now for the results. Yikes.
Wowie. Trick more than treat. The Big 12 definitely
heard our segment and said, no, thank you. Iowa
State and Colorado in particular. Let's start
with the Big 12. BYU lost to Central Florida
in four. That should not happen. I'm sorry. That's,
yeah. I don't even know what to say about that.
Yeah. Wow. Iowa State went out and beat Baylor
in three, and then they beat Arizona State in
five. Wow. They were like, you just ignored us
in the rankings. You skipped over us. I mean,
they're not wrong. So my question to you is,
with those two wins, is Iowa State for real?
I don't even think I can say anything anymore
because I'm like, I don't know. They had a good
week. Are you going to have a good week this
week? Next week? The week after? I don't know.
I mean, those are two big wins. I think you've
got to give them some love. I know they have
a tough schedule ahead of them, but congrats
to Iowa State. I think my big 12 rankings would
be totally different this week. Sorry, Iowa State.
We are really sorry that we didn't take you seriously
enough to talk about you last week. We're going
to watch you. This is karma. Arizona beat TCU
three straight. TCU is going through it. on the
downswing they peaked three months too early
yeah the tcu ship is sinking and filling with
water faster than they can bail it out and that
offense is just Too fast to be controlled at
this point. Fast and furious. Wow. I'm off them.
I was giving them the benefit of the doubt. They
were my surprise team early in the season, and
I'm off them too. You just can't get it together
these days. No, their last several matches have
just looked disjointed, and I can give you two,
but now it's a pattern. Yeah, I'm not. I think
they're going to finish fourth or fifth in the
Big 12 now. I can't believe I had them as second
last week. What was I thinking? What was I on
last week that I said all this stuff? They started
really well. And you would assume that getting
that offense dialed in was going to be the hard
part. But it has just fallen off the rails. Well,
the last one is Colorado beat Baylor in 4 -2.
So Baylor went through it last week. Congrats
to Colorado. I mean, I didn't think, having watched
them play, that they would compete with those
top teams. They're big, but skill -wise, and
they keep winning. At the very least, we gave
everybody a reason to reach out and tell us how
wrong we were, so you're welcome. Okay, SEC,
Missouri beat Tennessee in four. And Florida
lost to South Carolina in four. Welcome to the
ranking. Goodbye again. We've talked about this
lack of consistency. I had Missouri pegged as
a dark horse at the beginning of the season.
They did nothing. Now they're beating ranked
teams. What is going on? Tennessee, you're in.
You got to keep it together. Florida, you just
got in and then you go lose to South Carolina.
Like, come on now. Yeah. I don't understand what's
happening there. ACC, North Carolina beat SMU
in five. Again. SMU, you climb up to number five.
You jump over Louisville last week and then you
pull this. There's just, I don't know if it's
a preparation. I don't know if it's heavy exam
time. I don't know if athletes are super excited
about Halloween and not prepared. But these losses
with the athletes and the previous execution
level that these teams have had, these shouldn't
have been games. Finally, we got the Big Ten.
Michigan. beat Penn State in five, and then Penn
State got crushed by Indiana three straight.
Honestly, I put that in because Penn State is
still ranked somehow, so I include them in this.
But, like, am I that surprised that Indiana beat
them? Not really, but in Michigan, it probably
should have been a good game, which it clearly
was. It went five. I'm just talking about Penn
State for interest's sake at this point. Well,
they somewhat righted the ship for a second there.
For a game. For one game. You look at a program
like that, you look at the history like that,
you would think, okay, I understand the crash
and burn with what happened with Izzy Stark.
It's going to take some time. The time has passed.
Well, and they start going up and you're like,
okay, here it comes. They're going to be competitive
now. They're figuring out what their team looks
like without Izzy Stark. You have people stepping
up, finding new roles. I figured they would keep
going and they would be competitive, but it just,
it's done. It's over. Dead amount of the ranking.
They're still like not even in the 20s. That's
the crazy thing. Yeah, I don't understand. Like
you guys. This is like what they did with the
Penn State men's team in the spring. Let's roll
that back. They kept Penn State men's team in
the rankings for so long. And I think they were
like 0 -8. That name value. I love that name
value. Last one, USC beat Minnesota in five.
I'm not that surprised about that one. I could
have seen. I felt like that was an interesting
result. It's an interesting. It's a lot of young
players. going after it. Two programs on the
rise, I think, given their young players and
how they're coming about. Minnesota's been getting
better. Yep, totally. So has USC, in my opinion.
A lot of wild results this week. Makes for fun
watching. Mostly from the Big 12, and I apologize
to them again. I'm so sorry. At the time that
this is going to be released, we will know what
the new rankings are. I'm very curious to see
what's going on. The two results we did not talk
about involved Texas. Yes, you know what we mean.
Don't worry, we're going to dive into that in
a little bit. So stick with us. Okay, so we got
a ton of positive feedback about the educational
offensive system talk from last week. So along
with that, we also got a request to do something
similar for defense. Now, I don't think it's
quite as straightforward to talk about defense
as it is to talk about offense, but we're going
to give it a shot. Okay. It's a little more nuanced.
The system needs to work together. Exactly. Well,
it needs to work together, but a good defense
is dependent on the offense that you're facing.
Your game plan. Exactly. I have two basic philosophies
when it comes to defense and then you build from
there. The first one is a successful defense
ends with either a stuff block or a good transition
attack. So if you can accomplish one of those
two things, that's kind of the overarching goal.
Same as putting the hitter in a hittable window.
And then the other thing about defense is you
want to take away or you want to limit the team
you're playing against, their strengths. You
want to force them. to beat you with things that
are their secondary shots or things that they're
not necessarily as good at. I think you're looking
at those two things. A, stuff block or good transition
opportunity, and B, you don't want to let a team
beat you with their strength. Those are kind
of the two premises that I build my defensive
systems off of. In theory, that makes a ton of
sense. In practice, how often do we see it executed
well? Oh, not very often. Not very often. Let's
get into how you do this. It starts with the
block. That is your first opportunity to affect
the attacker. First line of defense. But as we
talked about block and defense working together,
the thing that's really important is the blockers
can't see the defenders. So the blockers are
going to do their jobs and the defenders have
to work around what the blockers are doing. So
we had a question recently. about somebody saying,
hey, I see the blockers even indoor going, you
know, one or two behind their back. Yeah, I've
had some people write in asking what the symbols
are as well. Okay, so we can answer this right
away. If you put a one behind your back, that
means the blocker is taking away the line swing.
If I put a two behind my back, that means the
blocker is taking away the cross swing. And I
mean the outside blocker, not the middle. The
middle's only job, middle is a very complex position.
The middle's main job is to close the block to
the outside hitter so that there's no hole in
the block, no seam, because that leaves more
opportunities and more options that the defense
has to cover for. So the blocker in the middle
wants to just close the block to the outside.
The outside blocker is the one that is setting
the block. They are the ones that ultimately
determine where the block is set up. And when
you see them put symbols behind their back, they
are telling the defense behind them in the second
line what they are taking so that the defense
knows how to work around them to cover the court
as well as possible. So this is some of that
communication that we're talking about with the
block and the defenders working together. Everybody
has to be on the same page. You might also see
a middle go five or one, which means to the defenders
that they are taking away that side of the court
for the middle attack. There might also be symbols.
Different teams might have different symbols
if the middle has decided to commit block. on
a good pass with the other team's middle this
is all part of like your team's defensive identity
your system as a team but there is always an
understanding based on what the blockers are
showing the defenders of as to what is going
to happen i can't say every college team does
this but they should be doing this you should
have a game plan for every rotation that you're
playing against generally what happens is For
each rotation the setter is in, so if the setter's
in position one or six or five, that setter has
a pattern of distribution for that rotation.
If your video guys are doing their job and look
at enough video, pull enough data, you can extrapolate
the trends to determine what their order of preference
is on a good pass. on a medium pass, and on an
out -of -system pass. It's impossible to be all
over everything, so you're playing percentages
and probabilities when you're playing defense.
Some of the best defensive advice I've ever been
given is if you try to defend everything, you
defend nothing. Again, this comes back to what
we talked about at the beginning. You have priorities.
In rotation one, we are not going to let the
left side score down the line. That's priority
number one. Priority number two is we're not
going to let the middle hit to five. And our
last priority, you know, either might be the
dump or the right side. Or it's just like we
are not leaving X player with a single block.
There are so many different ways to approach
it and how to determine your priorities and what
those look like. Everybody has a job in each
rotation and you're trying to do your job as
best as you can. Let's talk about. some of the
blocking adjustments you can make to cover some
of these different scenarios. Setup one is called
bunch blocking. You actually see this quite a
lot in the college game where your three blockers
start primarily in the middle of the court or
very close to the middle of the court, and then
they work their way outside to block the outside
ball. I have several problems with how this is
executed at the college level. But the goal of
setting your block up like this is that you're
defending the middle of the court first because
it generally happens the fastest. So your outside
hitters are helping with that middle set to make
sure they don't score. Or their back row, generally
the pipe ball in this case. And then if the ball
goes outside, then we're swing blocking outside
to do that. That is a great strategy in theory.
However, it goes wrong, in my opinion, in a couple
ways. Watch some of the outside blockers as the
pass is coming in and they're bunch blocking.
They turn their hips to face the outside of the
court to start their swing block because the
offenses are some of them are very fast. Once
that outside blocker has rotated their hip, they
can no longer help in the middle. So there's
actually no reason for them to be standing so
far inside. Exactly. You're putting yourself
at a disadvantage because you're not. actually
in a position to help this is not in a position
to help and you're creating movement once you
get to the outside so you're not doing anything
particularly well it's a good strategy in theory
that is executed poorly i think honestly that
starts at the club level i think that's how swing
blocking is taught now at the club level yeah
it might be I haven't been in enough club practice.
And you see in NCAA how many one -on -ones there
are, particularly in the pipe and in the middle.
Teams have started prioritizing the speed of
the offenses and covering for that as opposed
to legitimately putting up a solid wall with
two -plus blockers every time, even against the
middle. Bunch blocking is your first setup, which
allows all three blockers to help with any of
the middle attacks. Something else you can do
and... you would see this or you would do this
against really fast offenses is you would take
your outside blockers and you would start them
maybe halfway in between the middle blocker and
the pin so that they're further outside and they
have less distance to cover when they go to block
that fast outside set. I think in the college
game, this would be a far more effective blocking
setup because you can still get one hand to help
in the middle. You stay square to the net. You
can step out and have really good hands when
you go to block the outside. And I think you'd
see a lot more effective blocking if teams did
this, especially since a lot of the offenses
are very fast and the sets are low. You don't
have to get high. You have to remember the benefit
of swing blocking is to try and get as high as
possible when you block. Which you don't want
to do when you're blocking anyway. You want to
go over the net really far. Unless you're blocking
the Russians. That's where you start. Don't go
high on the block, everybody. Get over the net.
So you see a lot of tools because of this. Shoulders
aren't square. Swing blocking requires really
good timing and vision to close. And it's a very
high level skill. So I think you should generally
move your outside blockers a little further outside.
Allow them to get stable. Work back into the
court and have your middles there. You can still
help with the pipe if you're disciplined and
you get one hand on the middle. Very few teams
beside maybe Louisville. are beating you with
their middle attackers? Nebraska. Fair. Nebraska.
Andy Jackson runs that slide like no other. In
an ideal world, if possible, you want two to
three blockers up on the pipe. You want your
right side blocker to help with the shoot set
in the middle and then react to the outside ball
over top. You want your left side blocker to
help on the quick that in front and behind the
setter. and react to the right side set in an
ideal world are we seeing that in the ncaa not
a ton anymore if you were bunching that is how
the responsibilities would be distributed those
are kind of your overview of how you would block
and what you would want to do there's lots of
technical stuff around executing a block but
we can talk about that another day now let's
talk about the defenders and what their jobs
are and Some of the basic setups that you see
with those defenders. There are several things
that drive you nuts when you watch college volleyball.
Specifically, let's talk about those defenders
in one and five to start. What's your ideal setup
and responsibilities given a line block and a
cross block? So if the outside blocker is lining
up, taking away the line swing, that means that
the hitter. Should not be able to score down
the line. Obviously, last week we talked about
the hitter has all the control. Okay, but if
we're talking volleyball theory here, that means
the hard -driven ball is most likely going into
the angle. So the person that's digging down
the line needs to be ready to dig the tips. If
you are capable of reading the tips and starting
far back to get the touch off the block and then
reading the tip and running under, perfect. If
you're not particularly fleet of foot or you're
not. Like most right signs. Yeah. Or you're not
great at reading the hitter. That is when you
should go up under the block so that you're closer
to the tip. What I hate is when the blockers
leave line and the line diggers come up for tips
anyways. You're not taking anything. You're not
taking anything away. Okay. You just got a target
on your face. Pet peeve. I hear about that all
the time. So that's that. Position six gets a
little more nuanced with a little more reading
involved. Talk to me about some of the strategies
you can use against different hitters and then
what your responsibility is as a six digger when
the block is closed versus when it's not closed.
So if you're in position six, obviously it depends
on if you have a hitter who likes to find hands.
you need to stay really deep so that you can
react to the balls that are hitting the block
and going deep. If you are running a system and
you see that your wing digger, meaning the digger
that's in one or five, goes up under the block
for tips, that is leaving a lot of real estate
down the line for the hitter to hit an off -speed
shot, etc. So you need to shift a little bit
in that direction to help cover the gap. The
line diggers, the wing diggers are digging down
the line. That's when you need to stay a little
more neutral in zone six. And you want to play
the seam of the block. Obviously, if the block
is closed, this shouldn't be a huge seam. So
you're going to stay a little more deep because
everybody is back. But if the middle doesn't
manage to get to the outside hitter and there's
a hole in the block, that is position six's responsibility
to dig in between those blockers. This comes
down to team strategy and coach philosophy, but
you'll see often if a middle doesn't close, the
middle has two options. They can go straight
up and take away their lane so the defenders
can kind of fill in around them, or they can
try and reach into the seam and close the block
depending on how close they are. So those are
your two options. Okay, so we've covered blocking.
We've covered... defending this is i wouldn't
say it's a 101 class this is a 201 class because
block defensive systems are so complex like we
could literally get in the weeds and just go
crazy with this for our 301 class so we're keeping
it sophomore level okay we've done outside blockers
in the pin we've done the sixth blocker in their
responsibility now let's talk about the off blocker
okay by off blocker he means if the left side
attacker on the other team is hitting It's the
left side that's at the net on your side because
they're not a part of the block. And if the right
side is hitting, your team's right side attacker
becomes the off blocker because they are not
a part of the block. So basically this player
has two options. You can either drop off the
net and dig the hard driven angle swing, or you
can follow your middle blocker in and dig tips.
I guess you could also do a triple block if they're
out of system. But you basically have those three
options. Now, what I see a lot of is, let's say
for argument's sake, the left side on the opposing
team is hitting. You see the block go up. You
see the defender and one go in for tips. And
then you also see the off blocker come in for
tips. This is unnecessary. You're wasting a defender.
Exactly. You have two players covering the same
ball. That off blocker should drop off the net,
look for the hard driven. You know that any tip
short over the block is position one's responsibility.
So if the tip comes into the angle, you should
be fast enough to react to it. You want to think
of the defenders as like a pulley system, ideally.
So we talked about if the block takes away the
line, how zone one goes under for tips, position
six slides a little over, and you pull the whole
defense around with them. So the off blocker
should come off the net. What we didn't talk
about is if the block decides they're going to
block the cross court or angle swing, they leave
the line open. So the person who's digging down
the line should be back to dig the hard ball.
In that case, because that line digger is pulling
back, we talked about position six can stay deeper.
The libero or the angle digger can slide into
the angle more. And in that scenario, the off
blocker can go under for tips because the whole
system is kind of working the perimeter of the
court together like a pulley. Yeah, that's a
great way to think about it. So you're always
covering the correct position and as much court
as possible as a group. I think from a system
standpoint, that covers everything. I mean, that's
basic. Obviously, if you're playing a certain
hitter, things change. But as like a base theory
for block defense, that, yeah, that's it. And
I will say the one thing that I don't think is
executed very well is the ability to be in a
defensive position to dig a hard driven and read
a tip. There are so many times. There's not many
people who do that very well. You know, we've
talked about eye work on the block. That also
applies to defenders, and I don't think that
is executed very well. Don't watch the ball.
Watch the hitter. There's so many times you see
the ball can't be hit or the hand comes up to
tip and the defenders are just dug in for a hard
driven. That's a skill that I think should be
a huge part of defense that's not executed particularly
well. Well, I will say tips have gotten a lot
more aggressive now. True. So it is a little
harder to be able to read and react because people
have gotten so much more aggressive with it.
Yes, if somebody's coming in like the Statue
of Liberty and they're not pulling their arm
back, they're tipping, okay? So that should give
you a good idea of how defenses should operate
and some of the things that you'll see teams
doing. Now, we got a few more questions from
our offensive session, which we'll cover maybe
in listener questions. But if anything that we
talked about kind of doesn't make sense or you
have follow -up questions, please let us know.
We will get to them. But we wanted to give you,
again, an overview so you have something to look
at as you're watching matches and understanding
what those defensive teams are doing. All right.
As the title of the episode. explains we are
down to only one unbeaten team in the NCAA. Go
Big Red. That is Nebraska. Nebraska has been
steamrolling everybody. Very exciting for Cornhusker
fans out there, but not so exciting to break
down on a podcast. Nebraska was better. End of
episode. Yeah, basically. And it might be the
same story today. But we have gotten a ton of
questions about Nebraska. We watched the Nebraska
-Wisconsin game on Halloween night. So here we
go. We are going to talk about that and the Cornhuskers
in general. So before we get into all of the
questions that everybody has, let's talk about
the game probably briefly because it honestly
wasn't much of a game. How would you summarize
it? Nebraska is just better. That is exactly
what I was going to say. Word for word, three
words, actually. Nebraska is just better. They
won 25 -22, 25 -19, 25 -13. And they just have
the ability to apply pressure consistently from
all positions. They don't give you any plays
off and you have to earn wins. And Wisconsin...
Isn't at that level. They're missing their starting
setter, which I think really hurts them. Obviously,
Wisconsin is still second in the Big Ten. Yeah,
absolutely. We're talking about the top two teams
in the Big Ten. Regardless, Charlie Furbringer,
a huge difference maker for Wisconsin, undoubtedly.
But Wisconsin has held on to that spot. So there
are no slouches. No, they're still a good team,
but they're just they can't hang consistently.
with the firepower and consistency that Nebraska
is playing with right now, offensively and defensively.
Okay, so question. What do you think is the biggest
plus for Nebraska, and what do you think is their
biggest weakness? Oh, those are easy. Their biggest
plus is their middles. They are unbelievable
in the middle. You saw against Wisconsin. Alec
hit 538 and Jackson hit 600 and they're getting
set a ton. They can control the middle of the
court so well with those two middles. It's almost
unfair. Is there a better middle duo in the country?
No, no, no. I asked that question as a courtesy.
I'm not even sure. I'm not even sure it's close
to be honest. Everybody talks about the Kentucky
outside duo, not even being close to anybody
else. The Nebraska middle duo. Blows everybody
out of the water. And I think a big reason for
that is Rebecca Alec has increased her attacking
ability this season. You have to admire the work
that she's put in to build that connection and
to be offensive. Volleyball aside. She's just
so much fun to watch. She's so easy to cheer
for. I love watching her play. Give me that swagger
all day, every day, everybody. Okay. I love a
bit of personality. I love a bit of attitude.
And she brings it. And I'm obsessed. The thing
about it is she manages to do it in a way. Non
-threatening. Yes. She walks around with this
awesome swagger on the court. And you never think
it's malicious. It's actually. Quite incredible
to watch her. I'm really happy for her, and I
think she's so much fun to watch. That was a
softball question. Obviously, their middles are
there. I didn't finish the question. No, I know.
Part one was a softball. I think part two was
a softball, too. They're liberos. And that is
not something that we have said about Nebraska
for a long time. Honestly, watching that match,
that's where they're going to fall apart. That's
where they're vulnerable. The seam between Choboy
and Mouch. Which is confusing. The seam between
the two liberos is their weak spot on their server
seat. The dangerous thing about that is their
middles are so offensive that if a team can put
them in trouble from a passing standpoint, you
can also take away their best offensive options.
If I was Danny, that's what I would be nervous
about. That is my concern. If you want to beat
Nebraska. Break down their libero serve -receive.
Namely, and I think Olivia Mouch is a better
serve -receiver than Choboy. I think Choboy is
a better defender than Mouch. Break down Leni
Choboy's serve -receive to neutralize the middle.
That is probably the only way you're going to
beat Nebraska. Then you might have a chance.
Then you can put a double block in Harper Murray's
face, which I don't think she's great at swinging
against a solid double block. She needs a seam.
She needs a one -on -one, which the middles usually
give her. Adriano, she has gotten better as the
season's gone on. She's not impressing me at
all, though. So if you're relying on... Murray
slash Landfair and Adriano without the Middles
being a threat, that's how you're going to beat
them. I agree. We'll continue talking about Nebraska.
I did want to highlight a couple things from
Wisconsin's side that I thought went well for
them. Grace Egan was a bright spot for them.
She hit 471 on 17 balls. 17 kills or 17 swings?
17 swings. She didn't get set a ton. She still
performed when called upon. I like that move
because it allows them some flexibility on the
left side. They put Quest in for Viachick and
Viachick struggled. She hit negative 125. She
couldn't pass. I thought that she really hurt
them. So having Grace Egan gives them a little
bit of flexibility. Well, Egan is their right
side. Yes. But she was injured and we saw Quest
playing right side. So having Egan back and then
using Quest as a sub. Thank you, Kelly Sheffield,
for attempting a couple substitutions. Thanks
for listening to the podcast. He clearly listened.
Just kidding. I thought that was good, and I
liked seeing Quest on the left. I think that's
a good move for them. I think that's the right
place for her, to be honest. And then I also
really liked Alicia Andrews in the middle for
them. I thought, you know, going up against the
best middle duo in the country, I don't want
to say she held her own. But I liked what she
brought to the table. And I thought that, yeah,
this is a player that I think you can continue
to build around and has a future there. So those
were the bright spots for me in terms of Wisconsin
and what they were playing and probably why they're
still second in the Big Ten. Mimi Collier didn't
do bad. No, she was Mimi Collier. Not as dominant
as usual, but that's to be expected. Clearly
the focal point of the Nebraska game plan because
she's been performing so well, but hitting 234
with all the attention on you, that's respectable.
Yeah, I don't think you can ask for anything
more from her in that situation. I mean, I think
for me, this sums up the game. Wisconsin had
six block assists on the match. Nebraska had
19. Wisconsin had 40 digs and Nebraska had 54.
Not only were they very efficient offensively.
They had more blocks. They had more digs, which
means they had more transition opportunities.
It's an entire system. It starts with the serve.
The Nebraska serve created disruptions, which
allowed their block defense to get set up. It's
a whole system they've got going on. They were
just better in every facet of the game, period.
I think they only lost the lead twice maybe in
the first set, and other than that, they were
never behind. And the game never felt out of
control for them. They were always in the driver's
seat. So we've got a lot of questions about Nebraska
over the last little while, and we have answered
them here and there. But since we're talking
about them, let's just hit them all up. The first
one, speaking of Liberos getting targeted on
server C, we need a midseason update on your
opinion of the Nebraska -Libero battle and the
constant switch -ups. So we did talk about this
a few weeks ago. I think Dani's waiting for somebody
to grab the spot and run with it. And I think
she keeps giving both of them the opportunity
to do that. And neither of them are taking it
with their play. Or do you think that she is
strategically picking who is going to have the
jersey depending on who they play and what the
team needs that night? Maybe, but that team needs
passing all the time. If I'm Dani. I can sacrifice.
Our block defense is good. We serve well enough.
If we lose a couple digs, but we're in system
all the time, I'm taking that 100 % of the time.
Yeah, I think as a team, just any team, not just
Nebraska, your priority needs to be consistent
serve -receive. Yes. Because if you're siding
out at a high level and you're Nebraska, you're
going to steal points. 100%. You're going to
steal points with your serve. You're going to
steal points. They're great, not like an outstanding
serve team based on like aces, but it's strategic
to set up their block defense, which is their
strength. You're going to steal points, but you
need to be siding out at a very high level all
the time. So I would prioritize serve receive.
On top of the serve receive, you're waiting for
one of the liberos to come out and be a leader,
to run the serve receive, to be that player in
the back row. And I just haven't seen that. And
sometimes that's hard to do when you're not playing
amazing competition. But that spot is up for
grabs. And in my opinion, neither of the Liberos
have done enough to earn it outright. So I think
she's giving them a chance. I wouldn't be surprised
if that conversation is, I'm going to keep rotating
you guys until one of you makes it so I can't
take you off the floor. And I don't think that's
happened. All right. When talking about what
teams need to improve, most often you say more
balance is needed if the team... has that go
-to hitter. But when talking about balanced teams,
you say they need a go -to hitter to win a championship.
Which do you have as a preference? As a defender,
which would you rather face? So this question
wasn't originally about Nebraska, but I think
it plays into what's going on in Nebraska. Because
we have been partially critical of Nebraska's
insistence at... being balanced and not letting
not not letting but like not having a player
just be dominant on their own i spent a lot of
time thinking about this since i've read this
question because i'm like okay we have said both
of these things in different occasions yeah i
need to clarify my definition of a go -to hitter
i know it when i see it but i don't think i've
articulated it particularly well to this point
for me it's not about how many points you score
it's about your approach to how you attack the
ball and i would call that your risk profile
or your hitting profile let's look at an olivia
babcock when she's uncomfortable she swings for
hand she swings for the court you know she is
trying to score a point that doesn't mean she
doesn't tip that doesn't mean she's not strategic
but her default mentality is i'm going to swing
to score now the game is on the line She's taken
a rip at the ball. It doesn't necessarily matter.
Game is on the line. That's just how she approaches
attacking. Now let's flip this and talk about
Nebraska. I know the conversation always comes
to this. It's Harper Murray. She gets most of
the sets on Nebraska. And in watching her play
specifically against Wisconsin, if I was going
to put a player profile on her, I would say she
is an opportunistic, error -averse hitter. And
what I mean by that is... Of course, she's capable
of swinging high hands. She has the cross -court
swing, but she makes those swings when she's
very certain she's not going to get blocked and
she can see it's open. It's comfortable, yes.
As soon as she's uncomfortable, it's a tip, it's
a roll shot, it's a recycle. She is not challenging
her swings in uncomfortable positions. And there's
nothing wrong with that. There are players who
make a great living doing that, but she's not
necessarily the person. You want to set out of
system after 20 in big matches. Against a double,
triple, well -formed block. So let me ask you
this, knowing that we're talking about player
profiles. Who do you think embodies that go -to
hitter on Nebraska? Andy Jackson. I would agree
with you. And unfortunately, I hate to say it,
it can't be a middle because the middle attack
is so dependent on being... close to in system
there's more to being a middle attacker you can't
just depend on yourself you know it depends on
the quality of the pass predominantly because
Bergen Riley can get her the ball but yeah I
would say the mentality that we're talking about
on Nebraska is Andy Jackson so going back to
the original question the balanced offense is
always what you want you want all of your players
involved all the time. You want everybody to
feel engaged and the more you separate your sets
and the more balanced it is, the harder it is
for the opposing team to play defense. I will
always go for that outcome and Nebraska does
that really well. However, you need somebody
who has that risk plus mindset that I'm going
to go for those swings. in small moments, in
big moments. And that's where my question marks
with Nebraska. It almost wants to be in those
uncomfortable situations because they have the
confidence to know that they're going to get
the job done. I would say Mimi Collier has that
mindset. Absolutely. Kennedy Martin has that
mindset. Olivia Babcock has that mindset. Yeah.
It's less about the points and more about the
mindset or the approach to attacking. Something
that we didn't touch on about Nebraska that I
want to bring up. I am obsessed. With the fact
that Danny is keeping Andy Jackson in to serve,
which we didn't see in her first two years, and
using her as a back row option when she's playing
defense. Genius. I love that. Thank you so much
for breaking the mold of what a middle needs
to do. There is no textbook on how you need to
play, but you see... coaches get so wrapped up
and like, I am going to take one of my middles
out and make sure the libero serves for them,
blah, blah, blah. The fact that they are using
her as a serving threat, not having a DS serve
for her, letting her play defense and hit in
the back row. Thank you for not being cookie
cutter. Well, and this is a prime example of
a coach leaning into an athlete's strengths and
using them. And utilizing her. She's got a great
serve. Like, not all middles are, you know, Bambi
on ice trying to hit in the back row. She's athletic.
She's strong. She's physical. She jumps really
well. Yeah. No, I totally agree with you. I'm
so happy that this is happening, for real. Yes.
Okay, another question. Nebraska hasn't had any
player with double -digit kills in the last few
games. Is that a cause for concern or a feature
for this team? I think when this question was
submitted, they had played, like, none. super
great competition and they're steamrolling everybody
not even close in three sets to me this kind
of comes back to the balance question it doesn't
matter who gets double digits it doesn't matter
who scores points as long as you're winning and
I honestly I think a lot of really really good
teams don't have that necessarily standout player
from a statistical standpoint everybody's getting
involved I don't think there's any issue with
that do you think DBK switching liberos each
game will eventually affect Nebraska negatively
later on postseason. John Cook has spoken about
DBK wanting to keep everyone happy, but will
that disturb the player's consistency? Same with
Taylor Lanphair and Sigler. Okay, I don't know
if Danny and John have had conversations offline.
I don't know what their interactions have been.
Maybe she has said that to him. I don't know.
But knowing Danny. She is not the kind of person
that does things just to make people happy. Watching
her coaching decisions, that's not my take on
it either. I think she's waiting, like we said
before, for somebody to take the spot. I think
she's giving them opportunity, but I don't think
it's to keep both of them happy. I think it's
because nobody has stepped up and earned a spot.
Will it affect them negatively postseason? I
mean, they've played the whole season like this.
I think it will. Really? We talked about how
we would try to beat Nebraska, but I think it's
the mindset part that neither one of the two
is taking that position for themselves. Maybe
that, but the way that the system is working,
I don't think so. I think if they go in with
uncertainty and nobody has taken the spot, that
is going to potentially be an issue. in terms
of executing for that player. They can win. I
mean, both of them are good enough to allow the
team to win for the most part, but I would want
that position solidified as a coach going into
the tournament. Well, I also love that they are
bringing Sigler in for Landfair as opposed to
the typical DS. You know, Sigler is a great player
in her own right and attacker. What I would love
to see is them using Sigler in a back row attack
situation when she is in the back row for Lanfair.
We know Lanfair is not a back row player. I don't
think that that switch up is weird because Lanfair's
been getting taken out her whole career at Nebraska
in the back row. I think it's good that they're
getting Sigler experience. Will she transition
into that front court role next year? Maybe,
probably. But I would love to see them use her
in the back row as an attack option when she's
there. I think that's why you have her on the
court. So I agree with everything you said. Why
is it that it seems this season Nebraska is getting
a ton of overpass kills in their games? Well,
one of the reasons is Andy Jackson is serving
and she's got a great serve. I just remember
when I played at Nebraska, I'm a dinosaur. So
it was like eons ago, but it was very air averse
serving strategy. because the block defense was
so good. Nebraska's identity is their defensive
strength. My guess is that the narrative was
always minimize service errors because our defense
will win us games. And I feel like with Danny,
it's like, yeah, our defense will win us games,
but we can accelerate the process by being much
more aggressive with our serve because our block
is also really good. So I think it's a question
of... being more aggressive and causing that
kind of lack of control on the other side. I
agree with your analysis of the mindset switch.
I also think they have a couple players that
hit the ball from a higher contact point and
possibly a little harder than most passers are
currently seeing. And I think those players are
driving a lot of those overpasses. Just as a
passer, when you don't see it, you're not sure
how much to take off your angle. is a little
off because the ball is getting on you a little
bit faster. The trajectory is a little bit different.
I think that aggressive mindset, again, with
the player profiles they have, force a few more
overpasses. Well, and the discussions from the
other team, it might be like, we are not going
to beat Nebraska if they've got a double block
in our outside spaces the whole match. We need
to push our passes to the net to make our middle
an option. I don't know if that's the case for
sure, but I would assume that discussions are
we need to force our passes to the net to give
ourselves a chance. Do you think Andy Jackson's
level of success on the slide will translate
at the same level professionally and internationally?
Yes. I was actually thinking about this while
I was watching the Wisconsin game, and I agree.
I think it will because she gets off the ground
fast off of one leg. Her contact point is very
high. She's able to hit really good angles. I
think it will. I agree with everything that you
said. Her slide attack is not going to be what
limits her international career. She's going
to need to become a little bit more of a disciplined
blocker, I would say, and definitely needs to
be able to hit in front of the setter, which
I think she's totally capable of. Those would
be the areas where I'm like, hey, that's where
you need to see improvement, but I think her
slide is money. It's been a little tough to talk
about Nebraska because they've just been so dominant.
It's fun to watch if you're a Nebraska fan, but
from a quality of volleyball standpoint, it's
been a little bit of a yawn fest. And to just
have a discussion about it, it's like Nebraska
crushed again. What do you say? But I think these
questions were really good. It was fun to watch
them play Wisconsin. Even though it wasn't close,
there were... Good plays, Wisconsin pushed them
at least a little bit, forced them into something.
So, yeah, it was good. I enjoyed watching them
play. I think the questions were great, and now
we'll see who else comes up and if they're challenged
anymore. And I know we addressed this, is Nebraska
going to go all conference play without losing
a set? And I was bullish on that not happening.
I'm sliding into it might be possible. Like,
they're playing that well. We'll find out. Let's
see what happens. So the only other remaining
unbeaten team heading into this week was Texas.
Boy, did they blow that. They lost not just one,
but two matches this weekend. It was not good
for the Longhorns. They had two. I mean, both
opponents they played are top ten opponents.
It was a tough weekend, for sure. The Aggies
game was better than the Kentucky game. So rough.
Let's go. Let's go match by match. And then we
can talk about some of the trends we saw over
those two games and what they have to do to kind
of right the ship. So let's start with the Aggies.
What was your impression of the match? I've not
been high on Texas A &M this season, but I thought
Kendall Stowers was so good. 45 swings, 22 kills,
hit 400. Yeah, that's pretty good. I thought
Casa Paula was really good. 23 sets, 15 kills,
hit 609. Holy moly. And then Lednicki is just
their, like, solid, steady. Garbage eater. Go
-to player. She didn't actually play amazingly
well. No. She hit under 200. She didn't need
to. And it was crazy because after 10 in the
fifth set, they didn't set her. The ball exclusively
went to. Stowers and Kosokpala. We've talked
about teams that have go -to players and then
balance. For me, this was Texas A &M kind of
figuring out what that balance was. Texas obviously
had a game plan to slow down Lednicki, and I
guarantee you they thought, we stop Lednicki,
we're going to win. And they had two other players
step up, and their setter... recognized what
was happening and gave them more balls and Texas
could not adjust and slow those other two players
down that to me was a master class in understanding
the assignment for the game what the other team
was doing and then making adjustments so I think
kudos to Texas A &M for sure it was cool to see
other players stuff I mean Star Wars has been
having a pretty good season so far it's not like
she's coming out of nowhere but she was the show
she did outstanding Tori Stafford also was very
good. Very good. The way that they were running
her on that high inside set and she was just
punishing the ball into the sharp angle. Unstoppable.
That was one thing that I didn't like about Texas
A &M. They did not pick up when they were running
that set and it happened consistently. I kept
waiting for them to make her hit line, but I
was like, okay. But it was still impressive that
she was hitting that angle every time. And the
amount of distance she can cover in the air to
close to that ball is super impressive. Yeah.
Abby VanderWaal attacked well in system. Yes.
Qualified a bunch of stuff. Yeah. Let's talk
about Texas now that we've stopped gushing about
Texas A &M. I mean, we gushed for like a minute.
That's a lot for us. That's a lot for us, but
I feel like the people are not going to be happy
with how little time we spent on them. Well,
we can go back if we need to. Okay. My problems
with Texas. I mean, we're going to talk about
both matches, but I think there were a couple
common threads that ran between both. So we can
highlight those and then talk about how they
affected each match. So what did you see overall?
And if there were any similarities between their
loss to Kentucky and their loss to Texas A &M?
I don't think Texas serves aggressively enough.
I think both Texas A &M and Kentucky were in
system. Always. Yes, I would agree with that.
They were all options all the time. They were
serving muffins, okay, over the net. I think
that makes it very hard to set up any type of
defense. Especially when the attackers coming
at you were as good as Texas A &M and Kentucky.
Exactly. Because they did what they did. It's
not like, or what they normally do. It's not
like Kentucky or A &M did anything outside of
the box. Brooklyn delay and... Eva Hudson for
Kentucky put up unbelievable numbers. Everybody
else was not that good. They had 38 kills between
the two of them and both of them hit over 400
and nobody else really did anything. You need
to serve a little more aggressively to not make
it so easy. Do you know what I mean? Sometimes
you'll see servers struggle with. Either the
depth or moving players side to side. But Texas
struggled with both. They served the middle third
of the court so the passers didn't have to move
forward or backwards. And then they served right
at players. No seams, no nothing, and no pace
on the ball. Well, and then in the Kentucky match,
they served Brooklyn DeLay every single ball.
She was nailing these passes. Like, how about
we mix it up a little bit and see if we can break
somebody down. Yeah, no adjustments. Zero adjustments.
I kept waiting for something to change for a
strategy, especially in a Kentucky match. Yeah.
Because Texas served a little bit better in sets
three and four against Texas A &M. They got them
in a little bit of trouble after serving poorly
for the first two sets, but we saw no adjustments
versus Kentucky. No. So I have an issue with
their serving. Their passing is not consistent.
Who did you think struggled passing the most?
Probably... Vanderwall when she's in the front
row. And honestly, it kind of affected everybody
at different points in the Kentucky match. I
did not think their libero Emma Halter had a
very good passing game. I thought she was pulling
balls off the net. Kentucky specifically, but
there were times where she struggled against
A &M as well. Kentucky specifically was trying
to serve to one to make Swindle set from behind
her, which I think is a very good strategy. You
know our opinion on Swindle. We don't like Swindle.
That was going to be my third issue with them.
There were some interesting serving strategies
against Texas that I thought exposed a few potential
weaknesses. My third issue is their setter. I
feel like they're better when the libero has
to set an in -tempo back set ball to Torrey Stafford
than when Swindle has to set anything. That might
be a little facetious. So for all you people
who are about to get on your keyboards and tell
me how mean I am, I'm exaggerating, okay? Thank
you. But I will say, anytime Swindle had to bump
set, the balls were almost unhittable. That,
I will stand by. There were a couple times where
she bumped set balls where her team didn't know
who was supposed to be hitting. One ball hit
the floor, the other one went over a hitter's
head, there was one outside the antenna. Her
bump setting was... not good and in fact the
team bump setting in general is not good anytime
they had to go to their platform to set one of
their players it was almost exclusively a volley
over that was a huge issue you guys know how
i feel about out of system setting you know how
i feel about running a middle in an out of system
setting it is basics people it is requires focus
engage those glutes lift the ball okay but i
think it highlights how things break down right
from the get -go you normally only see maybe
two or three bump sets a match if you're passing
relatively well they weren't there were many
of them and those balls were unhittable there
were compounding mistakes for me the pass wasn't
good and the set wasn't good and hitters weren't
making good decisions very rarely in watching
texas this week did i think hey that player bettered
the ball and to me that was kind of the underlying
issue you're not going to pass great all the
time you're not going to set great all the time
But nobody kind of made that next contact better.
That's what I saw most of. I'm going to go back
to Kentucky. You know that their franchise players
are Brooklyn DeLay and Eva Hudson. How are you
letting them go off on you like that? Like, make
the right side beat you. Make the middles beat
you. Get a double block set up early with the
defense in position every time against those
two. I don't understand how they let that happen.
The defensive game plan against Kentucky left
me scratching my head. Yeah. You could literally
go stand all three blockers on the left side,
and you'd probably have been more successful.
The other thing is, like, you're serving muffins
to Brooklyn Delay. At least if you're going to
serve a muffin, make her move. Short. Make her
pass a short ball to at least make her life difficult
getting outside for an approach if you're going
to insist on serving her every single ball. I
think Texas took Halloween off. That's my opinion.
Trick or treat. There was not a lot of good things
happening from a preparation standpoint, from
a game plan standpoint. It was kind of head scratching.
We watched a bunch of them early in the season,
and I was like, yeah, they're legit. I was very
disappointed watching them this weekend. Okay,
so let's... I was happy. Okay, I was impressed
with Tori Stafford. Tori Stafford was steady.
She's doing her job. Yes, and even from a leadership
standpoint, I saw her... In Pitt, you never really
saw her get fired up. There were a lot of personalities
on that team. And I don't want to say she didn't
get fired up. She had emotion, I thought. She
was maybe the third leader on that team from
an emotional input standpoint. I really liked
her stepping up. You could see her get mad a
couple times in the Texas A &M match and then
come back and make a big play. I thought for
me, her leadership, even though they lost. was
a highlight. I thought she did a really good
job in that regard, both with her leadership
and with her play. I think Kari Spears is doing
a good job. I think offensively, Abby VanderWaal
is doing a good job. I don't think their middles
are effective enough offensively or used frequently
enough to have a big impact. And obviously the
issues that we outlined, but I think their outside
core is very strong offensively. So there were
a couple of things that I wanted to highlight.
I thought Kari Spears struggled in the first
two sets against Texas A &M and then found her
rhythm in the third and fourth set. And for me,
that's important because as a freshman, how you
deal with adversity, I think says a lot about
you. And the fact that she could maybe not start
her best, they're on the road, it's a hostile
environment. There's a lot of emotion there.
For her to be able to level out and continue
to take good swings, I don't care what the result
is, but her approach and attitude didn't change.
I was really impressed with that. Abby VanderWaal
was level, like you said. I thought she was really
good in system. I think out of system, she was
exposed a little bit. When she has to slow down
her approach, when the timing's not quite right,
I think she loses her vision. I didn't love her
decisions in those moments, so something for
her to work on. I actually think overall it's
good for Texas to lose these matches with these
young players in here, a little bit of a reset.
I think it's tough when all you do is win as
a freshman, and you don't really learn how to
deal with those situations. So going into the
tournament, I know we still have some conference
playoff, but I think this is going to serve them
well long term. So do you think Nebraska and
Texas are still the top two teams in the country?
No. I think Texas is better than they showed
this weekend. Do you think Kentucky is better
than them? I think if both teams are playing
to their fullest potential, Texas is still better.
But I think Texas' low end is also lower than
Kentucky's. I mean, what we saw was... If Texas's
passing breaks down, they have some holes that
you can exploit. They don't run the middle very
well off the net. Swindle, I don't love her footwork.
I don't think she can see the middle when it's
pulled off the net, so you know where the ball
is going. Torrey Stafford's going to score. Kari
Spears does a pretty good job at a system, but
Vanderwall struggles in that regard. So I think
that with a solid game plan and really good serving,
there are some ways that you can take advantage
of Texas, and they're not infallible. With a
freshman left side, the libero for Texas, Emma
Halter, needs to pass the seam, needs to be a
little more in charge, and needs to be dialed
in on serve -receive. I think that's going to
be one of their keys moving forward in terms
of avoiding this situation, because you know
teams now are going to come at Vanderwall. They're
going to serve her in the front row, try and
take her out of rhythm. And Texas is going to
need to find a way to shelter her a little bit,
take a little bit of that pressure off so that
she can stay in system. And they're going to
have to be able to run their middle. They took
Ames out. They put Harvey in. They seem to have
a little bit of a rotating middle situation right
now. That connection between Swindle and the
middle or whoever, which other setters coming
in and playing on that double sub, their middle
needs to be a threat. Do we chalk this up to
just a bad weekend or red flags? I think it's
both. I think that teams will see what the game
plan or the roadmap to putting Texas in trouble
is. I'm curious to see what adjustments Texas
makes. Like, do they chalk this up to, hey, we
just didn't serve well enough? Or do they look
at... But I feel like that's a mindset. I agree.
I feel like they've been able to get away with
it and playing good top 10 teams at this point
in the season where people have dialed in their
systems. They have played a lot of top 10 teams,
a lot of top 25s, but they did the top, top teams
early. Yeah. So people have dialed their stuff
in. Well, they're super physical as a team. And
when everything is messy on both sides of the
net, that physicality really helps. When you
get teams that are buttoned up, like Texas A
&M played really good defense. They had a very
good system in place. They out -blocked them
14 -4. That doesn't happen by accident. And this
is the second year in a row that A &M beat them.
Well, there is that too. Now that the systems
are in place, now that teams have game plans,
what is the adjustment? You're not just more
physical. So I think this is a crossroad for
them. I'm curious whether the coaching staff
will chalk it up to a bad weekend or whether
they're going to go back to the drawing board
and go, okay, here are the things that we really
need to focus on for the rest of conference play.
If you ask me right now, if Nebraska and Texas
played each other, Nebraska would systematically
tear Texas apart. Because they're just as physical.
Neither team is prolific on the service end,
but I think Nebraska serves better and more strategically.
I think if they were to play right now, Nebraska
would dismantle them. It's not a bad take. It's
not a bad take. All right. There we go. Nebraska,
as we said, the only unbeaten team left. Will
they hold on to it? Will they drop a set in Big
Ten play? We will find out. Texas needs to get
it together here to right the ship. You think
Kentucky's number two next week? Yes. All right,
everyone. Time for our favorite part of the episode.
You guessed it. It's lizard question time. Okay.
So question one, who are your three nominees
for coach of the year? Oh, a tough one right
off the bat. Okay. So I think number one for
me would be Dave Shundell. Purdue was decimated.
Holy moly. By the transfer portal. They lost
almost all of their top end players. He was considering
quitting after that happened. And I can't say
that I blame him. And he has got that team motivated,
playing well, beating good teams with nobody.
I say nobody. I understand everybody at this
level is good. But they don't have take your
pick. A blue chip player. And so to see. That
level of execution and compete when the team
and the coaching staff could have packed it in
after losing those players, kudos to him. I think
he's doing a fantastic job. I would say Steve
Aird at Indiana has done a good job. I watch
them play. You know, they're trying to run really
fast. They're doing a bunch of different things.
I think they're trying to find their own identity.
They're competitive consistently. Are they there
yet? I don't think so. I think it's hard to make
a case. I understand what you're saying about
him and he came to mind for me too, but I think
it's hard to make a case for him because they're
ranked like 24th currently. I feel like you need
to at least be in the top, you know, 15. If we're
doing a legitimate coach of the year award, I
think that's fair. When I think of coach of the
year, I think about... which coach is bringing
the most value to their team, which coach is
getting the most out of players that maybe is
exceeding expectation. Obviously, Danny's doing
a great job at Nebraska. I'm kind of thinking
outside of the box and looking at when I watch
teams, I'm going, that team is playing much better
than I expected them to play. I could make a
case for Kevin Hambly at Stanford. Totally. He
was my four. Who's your three? I really like
Trent Kirsten at Oregon. I love watching. Another
program that was decimated. I believe almost
everybody lost that program. He's a first -year
coach. His ability to get all new players on
board, playing the way he wants them to, I think
they have a bunch of freshmen playing on that
team. And they're competitive. They are pushing
teams. They are winning matches. I'm obsessed
with Clemente, you guys. I think she is in the
running for freshman of the year for me. She's
so good. I have to acknowledge what he's done
at that program from scratch, first year. I think
it's impressive. Is Oregon going to make noise?
Probably not. But again, watching them play,
if you had told me at the beginning of the season
that they would perform like that after losing
literally everybody, I'd have been like, you're
crazy. Well, I mean, it's so, I'm going to go
back to Hambly because he has a few freshmen
that are really doing well and they lost a couple
key pieces, which is why he's in the conversation
for me. I think the coaches who've had to legit
rebuild from ground zero and are able to put
together a competent, competitive team, deserve
way more recognition than they get because you
always see the ones who tell a kid they're interested
and the kid's like yes i'll sign on the dotted
line great that's why texas isn't in the running
for me that's why nebraska is not in the running
texas louisville like pit you know what i mean
those programs just like attract top talent whereas
like the coaches who Aren't working with the
blue chip athletes have had to completely rebuild
and just do it on their own without the prestige
or name of the school. A plus. Those would be
the highlights from my list. Okay. Question two.
Has Sarah ever low key cheered for an underdog
even once? No. Has she ever been one or one as
one? No. I feel like I have cheered for an underdog
semi recently. The only reason you would cheer
for an underdog was if you knew that person.
Like on a personal level. Oh, when does that
affect me? I don't discriminate people. If I
like you too bad, I'm not cheering for you. I
mean, I think she was cheering for the Jays in
the World Series. I think I was. They were underdogs.
I think I was. Hold on. I feel like recently
watching volleyball, I was cheering for some
kind of underdog, but clearly it's not standing
out in my mind enough. I will say I was an underdog
once. When? In the final in Brazil. My first
season in Brazil. We've talked about this on
the podcast. I played for Rio. We played Osasco,
the entire Brazilian starting lineup. My team,
I would say, were the underdogs. Okay. Yeah,
that's a fair assessment. And we won. Do you
think you were an underdog at the finals in Worlds
for beach volleyball? No. Okay. Because we were
the top two teams in the world. It wasn't like
crazy. I was thinking more U .S. Canada, not
necessarily. No, I wouldn't say that. I mean,
you haven't been an underdog very often. I have
been fortunate to play for some very, very good
teams. So it's been rare if ever that I've been
one. And I think that that's why I never cheer
for an underdog. Because I know how it feels.
To be the team or to be the athlete that everyone
loves to hate and that everyone wants to take
down. And I like can empathize with that. And
I don't like that. In fairness, when I play CBBA,
Sarah cheers for me and I'm always an underdog.
So there's that. There's that one. Question three.
What is the most prestigious path for a volleyball
player and which path is the most lucrative?
I would say. If you're a woman, the most prestigious
path would be to play top A1 Italy or for one
of the top clubs in Turkey. That's probably the
most prestigious. If you're a man, I would say
A1 Italy or a top team in Poland is probably.
Would you agree? Yeah, I think so. There are
some outliers who will make the final eight or
the final four in Champions League. If you're
competing in the quarterfinals or above in Champions
League, that's pretty prestigious, I would say.
Most lucrative, I would say for a woman playing
for those same teams. For a man, Russia. Go to
Russia. Or actually Asia. Yeah. Pays very well.
So I would say, yeah, if you're not. a star on
one of the top turkish or italian teams you will
make a ton of money if you go to asia or russia
yeah okay question four what are your thoughts
on the indiana setter's ability to take her eyes
off the ball look at her hitters the opposing
team's blockers and then execute the fast tempo
set i know it's messy sometimes but that's an
advanced skill for a freshman setter and she'll
only get better i have some thoughts okay you
go and then i'll give you my thoughts When you're
a top level setter, you look for the blockers.
You look for blockers movement so that you can
set away from where the middle is leaning or
cheating. You see some setters do the full turn
the head and look situation. And then you have
other setters who can just see that out of their
peripheral vision. Same as we've talked about
hitters being able to see the blockers or the
defenders behind. I think. Your number one priority
as a setter needs to be, as we talked about last
week, putting your hitter in the best position
possible to score. And for me, that means good
location, good tempo for your hitters. After
that, it's the hitter's job to score. It is a
bonus. It is a goal of a setter to be able to
get the hitters a one -on -one, but it doesn't
help the hitter at all if you're getting them
a one -on -one on an unhittable ball. OK, I would
much rather as a hitter have a nice, well -located
set against a solid double block than be scrambling,
having to tip a ball over one on one. That's
what I think. Your point is 100 percent valid.
I'm going to answer this question from a coaching
standpoint. So like so you're wrong. No, no,
no. You're 100 percent right. The answer is layered
for me. Very often I see players trying to learn
or execute the highest. level portion of a skill
they're doing. So you see it all the time. Setters
jump setting who can't set with both feet on
the ground. Attackers trying to make crazy swings
when their step close isn't right. There is a
progression to learning these advanced skills,
but you need your fundamentals to be in place.
As the question mentioned, looking to the other
side, taking your eye off the ball, that's a
high level skill. I'm not opposed to you learning
that. And as you learn that, it's going to be
messy at the beginning, 100%. My question would
be, is your jump set location consistent eight
or nine times out of 10 without you looking?
Do you have the fundamentals in place to put
this next piece into your game? I don't have
the answer to that because I haven't seen her
train. I haven't seen her develop. If it's in
place, go for it. Learn the skill, work on it.
You're a freshman. By the time you become a senior,
you're going to be amazing. If you don't have
those fundamentals in place, though, you're trying
to build on top of a wobbly... You're trying
to run before you can walk. Exactly. And then
that's not going to work. Are your fundamentals
in place? That, to me, would be what needs to
be answered before I could say, yes, go on and
practice this and get better at this portion
of the skill. Question five. Spill the tea, Sarah.
Who is the setter you had the best connection
with? I think we'd all like to know. Okay, I'm
going to say two. I know, I can guess who your
two are. Okay, guess. Number one is Fafal, who
is unbelievable. And I think you're going to
give a shout out to your number two, Rachel Holloway,
from your Nebraska days. Am I right? Those are
the two I was going to pick, yes. Okay, I played
with Fafal for my two seasons in Brazil, arguably
one of the best setters of all time. She was
at the tail end of her career when I played with
her. But her... her decision -making, the way
that she was able to fix questionable passes.
Oh, my gosh. It was outstanding. I feel so honored
and privileged to be able to have played with
her. Wow. Okay, I have to throw in a story here.
I already know what story it's going to be because
this is Faber -Fayal's story of all time. Okay.
How old were we when we were in Brazil? What
was I, 25? No. 26. I was 26. I was 26. He's older
than me. So we're in Brazil. This was the first
year we had ever been there. And at this point,
Fafau is in her late 30s. I think she was 40.
She might have been 40. I was trying to be nice.
And I'm in the gym watching practice on one of
the first days that we arrived in Brazil. I'm
sweating. It's so hot. It's an open gym. Adam's
just trying to set the scene. The ambiance. So
practice starts, and Fafau, in fairness to her,
was a little slow warming up. Like, she's not
hopping right in. And I'm like, okay, how is
this going to go? And I'm arrogant, and it's,
yeah. I'm not understanding what's going on at
this point. And I'm sitting there watching practice,
and this ball is passed tight, pretty close to
position four. And she runs after the ball, goes
up with one hand like she's going to set the
middle. And then flicks a one -handed set backwards
to Sarah. Perfect location. Perfect tempo. And
I had to pick my jaw up off the floor. And I
was like, that just shouldn't be possible. It
was maybe the prettiest thing I've ever seen.
True. And obviously, Rachel Holloway is on my
list. I played with her in college. I truly believe
that she would have been the setter for the U
.S. national team had she chosen to continue
playing. Her competitiveness, her fire, her hands
were golden. I honestly feel so lucky that I
got to play with her as well, and I think she
could have done some incredible things in the
sport had she chosen to continue. And she knew
when to set Sarah the ball. That's why I liked
her. No, I'm just kidding. Okay, our last question
of the day. Question six. When coaching at the
club slash college level, are they always trying
to make the attacker's window bigger? Why does
hitting high hands seem to be such a difficult
skill for hitters to do effectively in college?
I don't know if they're necessarily intentionally
trying to make the hitter's window bigger. I
feel like sometimes you are limited by your own.
The ways that they do try is working on the step
close, working on the last two steps of the approach
to really like get to the ball that way. I wouldn't
say that a lot of coaches necessarily focus on
that. I agree with you. Having a bigger hitting
window is a byproduct of being good technically.
A fast arm gives you a bigger window. A better
step close gives you a bigger window. And that's
regardless of how physical you are. So as you
become a technically more competent hitter, your
window gets bigger. It's a byproduct of becoming
more technically sound. So it may not be, hey,
this is what we're trying to do, but it happens
as you improve. In terms of college hitters having
a hard time finding hands. I honestly would argue
that I think they're getting a lot better at
it. definitely better than when you played yeah
and i think you have to because the blocks are
getting bigger there's a couple things that make
it defenses are getting better yes you less clean
kills means you have to go for hands but i think
there's a couple things that hinder your ability
to hit hands one is if the set's not in a spot
where you can see in front of you it's impossible
to hit hands you're guessing yeah i was thinking
setter inconsistency so that's that's a huge
one two is For really big hitters, if you're
playing against a small to medium -sized block,
the hands get up late. They're not there when
you're swinging. You're over top of them. That
also makes it hard to hit hands. And then blocking
inconsistencies in terms of the timing and whether
they're in the right place or they're not in
the right place, that also makes it hard to hit
hands. So there are inconsistencies kind of across
the board and a couple different facets of the
game that affect your ability to see and execute.
the high hand swing. I mean, and as you get to
a higher and higher and higher level, the skills
are much more predictable. So it's easier to
execute higher difficulty skills because you're
better able to predict what's going to happen
with the set, with where the block goes, et cetera.
So that is definitely a factor. These questions
you guys are getting. Killing it. Like, so technical
sometimes. You're getting into the nitty gritty.
We love it. Keep them coming. I think we knocked
off a whole bunch today during the episode itself
and otherwise. So our list is down to only 5
million instead of 7. So keep them coming. All
right. As always, we've got your matches that
you need to watch this week. So here they are.
On Wednesday at 8 p .m. Eastern, Minnesota versus
Wisconsin. Minnesota has been playing better.
Wisconsin just got kicked. They're missing their
setter. I think this could be a good game. I
think it could be. And it's like a border game.
Yes. So I'm looking forward to that one. I think
Wisconsin still has the edge. I don't think it's
going to be in three, though. I don't think it'll
be in three. Thursday at 7 p .m., we have Kansas
versus Colorado. Colorado still making waves
and still winning matches. So this will be a
big one to see if they can hold on to their currently.
seeded high position in the Big 12. Friday at
9 p .m. Eastern, we have BYU versus ASU. A little
shipwriting needs to happen. Well, based on my
prediction last week, potential number one, two
teams. No, I said TCU would be two. This is your
potential one, two teams in the Big 12. So we'll
see. But the Big 12 is an absolute mess at this
point. Friday then at 10 p .m. Eastern, we have
North Carolina versus Stanford. Got to give North
Carolina some love because they've been winning
matches. They've been upsetting some teams this
season. And they've become ranked. So I'm looking
forward to checking them out and seeing what
they're all about. And then Sunday at 1 p .m.,
Kentucky versus Tennessee. And those are the
matches that you need to be watching next week.
That concludes this week's episode of Volley
Talk. There's always something shaky 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 leave
us a five -star review. You can also find us
on Instagram at volleytalk underscore podcast.
If there's a topic you'd like us to discuss,
let us know by reaching out on Instagram or at
info at sarahpavin .com. Thanks so much for joining
us and we'll be back. Bye, guys.