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 Pavin, 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 parent stats guru.
Facts. There is never a dull moment in volleyball and we had another big week last week. We had
some international news, the NCAA top 16 was announced, and more exciting matches,
including a top 4 battle. Let's get started.
It's
last Sunday, the NCAA announced their mid season top 16 for the first time ever in the sport of
volleyball, kind of giving fans a look into what the tournament layout could look like.
It's obviously not set in stone, but it was interesting. Our top 4 seeds from that
announcement were Nebraska, Pitt, Penn State, and Louisville.
I think I agree with those selections, maybe not in that order, but we'll get into that later on
the show. Interestingly, if you listened to our first episode, one of the major questions from
that was who will draw SMU because SMU has upset both Nebraska and Pitt this year.
Turns out they took the 7 seed, which if this hypothetical situation were to take place,
they would be playing Pitt to go to the final four.
I like that matchup. I want to see if Pitt goes undefeated for the rest of the season and sees
them in the quarterfinals. It'll be interesting to see what the mentality is and how they come out
in that match specifically.
Another interesting kind of ranking situation, Texas was at 8, Wisconsin was at 7,
Wisconsin was at 9, so those two would play each other, and the winner of that, of course,
if everything were to hold true, would play Nebraska to go to the final four.
Obviously, these are always interesting. It's in the best interest of the NCAA to have as many
conferences represented in the final four as possible, so do I think some massaging happened
here to make it as equitable for the conferences as possible? Absolutely.
What do you think about those TV ratings?
So, I don't know, I'm curious to hear your guys' thoughts. Obviously, the way this is laid out,
I don't agree with it 100%, but this is a typical layout for the tournament. I'd be curious to see
if this holds true once selection Sunday happens at the end of November, but gives fans something
to look forward to at the very least.
In international news, it was announced that Karch Cry would be the head coach of the USA Men's Team,
moving on from his successful career coaching the women's team.
We don't really have many more details other than that. My biggest curiosity is,
was this facilitated by USAV, or was this something that he wanted personally?
Yeah, it really makes you wonder, has it always been his goal to lead the team that he played
for when he was an athlete? Is he like, you know what, I took care of business with the women's
team, lots of medals, including a gold at the 2020 Olympics. Yeah, I find it to be a very
interesting move. I'm curious who's going to take over the women's program. As of yet, nobody has
been announced for that job. So it'll be interesting to see if he is able to turn around the men's
program, not that they need turning around, like they won bronze in Paris. So they're very good.
But I'm curious to see if he'll be able to kind of lead them to a gold medal that they haven't seen
since the 2008 Beijing Olympics.
The other thing from a program standpoint is there are many more women's coaches in the US,
given the state of the college game versus men's coaches. And I wonder if they thought he would
make the biggest difference or impact on the men's side now that Sprah has moved on to CEO of USAV.
Regardless, not the news that I was expecting to receive last week. So all the best to Karch in
this new role. And I'm really excited to see what he does.
In Big 12 action, we saw Baylor beat TCU 3-2. And I'm trying to think about how I would classify
that match in an interesting match.
It was interesting. Melanie Perra was solid as ever for TCU. She is definitely the foundation
of that team. And it's really fun to see her play.
I agree. She hit 350 on that match, which was well above her season average.
She sees the court really well. She makes it look effortless. I'm impressed by her defensive play,
just the way she's able to read the game. I thought she was a standout for sure. And then
Elise McGee for Baylor had a career high 30 kills to go along with six aces.
Hitting 328 in that match, she was very efficient and had 61 attempts. They really leaned on her
ability in that match.
It was, it was a game of runs. We've been saying that I feel like every week. The crazy thing for
me was at the very end of the match, TCU was up 8-6 in the fifth and the match ended 15-8 for Baylor.
They did not score again. Nine points in a row. It was wild.
Well, and they had a six point run in the fourth set to come back into the match and give themselves
a chance. There was just a lack of consistency for TCU. Well, one of the other noticeable stats from
that match was the serving difference. You had Baylor with 11 service aces and only nine errors
and TCU had eight aces, but 12 service errors. So there was a little bit of a disparity there.
Fair. It was, it was an entertaining match to watch. TCU has a huge history with Baylor,
the head coach, having been the assistant at Baylor for so many years. His wife played for Baylor.
He had a niece on the team. So it was just like a really interesting family dynamic and like going,
seeing him go back to like the place where he had been for so long. Like there's always a lot of
feelings attached to that, but I thought it was a fun match. Homecoming weekend at Baylor. So people
were rowdy. It was fun. There was a good atmosphere in that building. I was glad we chose to watch that
match this week. We also had Kansas crush Utah 3-0, which I was not expecting. Me neither. Last week
you asked me if Kansas would go undefeated in big 12 play. And I was like, no. And I thought Utah
would be one of the teams that could take them down. Man, was I wrong. Wow. That was, that was so
one-sided. It was shocking. Utah just never got anything going. They had a few players who played
well, but combined their left sides hit 056 and 057 on 50 attempts. You're not going to win matches
when your outside hitters are hitting with those kinds of numbers. It honestly just looked like
they could not find a rhythm. And I will point out the two hitters who had those numbers. It was
West and Gabadlo, a right side, outside combo. It happened when they were in the front with their
setter. Utah runs a 6-2 and every time Grace Hammond came in for her setting time, Kansas went on a
6-0 run, almost without fail. I think they had a 6-point run, a 7-point run, and a 6-point run
in each set respectively. In that exact rotation when Hammond came into position one. And West and
Gabadlo were her hitters at that time. Coincidence? There's definitely a correlation there.
Well, both of those hitters are generally much better than that historically on the season
attacking. And so for both of them to have an off night at the same time, I never want to blame a
setter, but I thought they struggled in that match. I thought they did struggle with setting and
serving. Well, two aces to 13 errors versus Kansas' four aces to six errors. Yeah, again,
we were expecting big things. It did not happen. To Kansas' credit, they looked like a much
much different team than last week against K-State. Their ball control was much improved.
They looked much better. So that was cool to see. Well, London Davis hit 430 on the match.
But I think the thing that impressed me the most about watching Kansas this week was how evenly
their offense was distributed. Their middles were engaged. They ran a spread. They made life hard
for Utah. And I thought the setter for Kansas did a great job. I thought the biggest discrepancy in
that match was the setting. In the Big Ten, Michigan State reverse swept USC in LA for their
first conference win of the season. That is a big deal. So congrats to Michigan State for that win.
Wisconsin also beat Purdue three straight. Did not expect that. And that match didn't look close.
No. We also had UNC beat Florida State three two. And we have got our two feature matches of the
week. Number seven, Texas lost in five to Texas A&M at home. And Pitt versus Louisville was the match
that everybody was expecting. Our first feature match of the week is Texas versus Texas A&M.
Coming into this match, Texas has not dropped a conference match in Gregory Gymnasium
in 10 years. They won 80 matches at home in conference play in a row. That streak is wild.
And to think it would come to an end against Texas A&M is a little shocking and potentially
disappointing for Texas. They were, Texas went three and three in the preseason for the first
like six matches. They were running a 5-1 at that time. And since those six matches, they switched
to a 6-2. They had been 9-0 since. So I mean, makes sense that they were continuing with that.
But for me, the setting was their biggest issue. Not just from their setters, from everybody.
Well, definitely two separate issues. One, they didn't pass super well. So they did have some
other players setting balls, which almost never went well. And neither setter really found a rhythm.
And we don't need to talk about this at length, but this seems to be an issue across the board
with teams who are playing a 6-2 this season. At least when they're not successful. So I thought
the setting for Texas really affected their outside hitters. Devin Ka Hawaii hit negative 0-30 on 33
sets and Jenna Wennis hit negative 0-36 on 28 sets. And I will be the first one to criticize a
hitter if I don't think they're doing well or they're making errors. But watching that, the ball just
seemed in a different location. They struggled to get into rhythm. I mean, obviously there's always
more you can do as a hitter, but I thought it was a tough outing for them. I can get behind what you
just said for Jenna Wennis. I don't agree with you though for Ka Hawaii. I think I saw her hit one
ball angle. She hits line and straight. She went off in set one. She was hammering balls down the
line in set one. And then to A&M's credit, they made the adjustment. They moved their block to
the line. And after that, she was either getting touched on the block or getting roofed or hitting
out because she just insisted that she was hitting that angle and only that angle. And I haven't
seen Texas play enough this year to know if that is just indicative of her hitting style or if,
like you were saying, the set was maybe forcing her to go there. But from my observation, she was
hitting what she hits and she didn't make an adjustment. I do agree that Jenna Wennis was
hung out to dry a lot. She was put in trouble. So those numbers and what you said, I agree with.
But watching that match, I was like, A&M adjusted how they were going to defend Ka Hawaii. And she
was just like, no, this is what I'm going to do. What did you think of Madison Skinner's play?
I thought it took her a little while to get in rhythm. She was a little slow in the first set,
but then she went off. I think her and Reagan Rutherford kind of like put the team on their
back offensively. You could actually see there's one rotation where both of those two are in the
back row together. And Texas would give up runs of points when Skinner and Rutherford
were in the back row. But when they were in the front row, they were almost unstoppable when they
were given a ball that they could hit. A ball that was in front of them that they could accelerate
to. They were outstanding. Unfortunately, when in transition or when the ball wasn't passed well,
they were having trouble as a team being able to put them in a good position to score.
Well, I was amazed at the end of the match when I saw the stats that Madison hit 415 because she
started, I think in the second set, the beginning, she was at zero. And credit to her on a tough
night for her team to find a way to score points and give them a chance. Something else that I found
really interesting was there would be certain rotations when Texas was serving that they
wouldn't have a setter on the court. They would allow their right side Kahahaua to serve because
she does have a nice spin serve when it's in rhythm. And she definitely started out the match
feeling really good with it, but they would keep a setter off the court to allow her to just
serve. But like nobody on the team was really picking up the slack from a setting perspective.
So things just kind of went sideways. And I found that to be really interesting because like things
just did not seem to flow in those situations. And I'm like for a team that is struggling to
put their hitters in a good position consistently this match, you'd think you'd want to set her on
the court at all times. Well, I understand the strategy of leaving a big block up front and
putting an aggressive server there. But when you're out of system setting, even from your libero is
as bad as it was for Texas, you're basically saying if we don't get a block, we're not going
to score a point. At that point, you might as well put a setter back there. You might not get quite
as good a serve, but at least if you get a dig, you're going to have a chance to transition.
There were some adjustments that I thought needed to be made on Texas's side based on the feel of
the match that didn't happen. Such as? Well, same thing. You could have put the setter in
in that rotation. You could have gone to a 5-1 at certain points just to allow a setter to find a
rhythm. Even if it was for one rotation where you let the setter stay on nine rotations instead of
three and off and three to find a little bit of rhythm, you don't have to go to the 6-2 every rotation.
For me, the difference makers in that match were the out of system attacking. Texas could not
put their hitters in a position to be successful in those situations and how each team used their
middle. Well, that if we're going to transition to A&M, there's a few things that they did
really well. I thought they started slow on the middle, but in the fourth and fifth set specifically,
they pushed the middle even at the end of sets. And given the blocking stats for this match,
we had three solo blocks and 14 block assists for Texas A&M and six solo blocks and 18 block assists
for Texas. Blocking was a huge factor in the match and the fact that Texas A&M pushed their middle
a little late in the game opened up the hitters and I think that was the key to them being successful.
I was very surprised, particularly when set five went down to the wire. I was shocked at some of
the balls that Wach decided to run the middle on. 100% props to her ballsy choice. They scored,
they were effective, but you don't typically see that and I was so impressed and so excited
that she's like, no, we're doing this. And it was awesome. Texas on the other hand really struggled
to find a rhythm with their middles as well. I found the Texas sets to the middle to be
consistently low. You saw the middles like swinging from their shoulder height pretty
much for most of the game. So they were not an offensive threat at all. So that difference was
massive. One of the other things I saw from A&M was they did a really good job of understanding
where they were as a team in specific situations. And what I mean by that is when they were in
rhythm, their setter was pushing the tempo and the hitters were coming in and they were getting
good connection. When Texas A&M was out of system, I thought the hitters did a really good job
of waiting on the sets, seeing where it went, and then being aggressive coming in and giving Texas
trouble in those out of system balls. Agreed. And I've seen it a lot in NCAA volleyball in that
offenses are fast and it's great to be able to just like run your approach with the timing you're
comfortable with. But I often see a lot of hitters coming in too early out of system. And that is,
I agree with you, something I noticed with A&M too. There was a mutual understanding of what
situation the team was in or what situation the pass or dig put the setter in. And the timing from
the hitters slowed down when it wasn't possible to push fast tempo. They had a really good
relationship there. I was also impressed with Logan Lydnicki. They went to her a ton early.
And I thought it was just going to be the Lydnicki show. Like, let's just, we're going to
ride you till the end pretty much. Luckily, they did start to like spread things a little more as
we, as we touched on with the middle, but she was going for it. I love a lefty, Obvi.
Yeah, I'm actually really curious to know, was it the coaching staff that identified this? What is
the, was it the setter that had a feel for the match and said, I need to get these players going?
Just that decision was interesting because I agree, Lydnicki brought them to the point in the
third set where they had a chance to win, but they had a beat on her and she started to not score as
efficiently. And that switch in offensive mindset allowed her to then score points in the fifth set
again. I mean, she's definitely a high risk, high reward hitter. She is effective. She is going for
it. You don't often see her taking off speed shots or trying to fix balls with a tip. She's like, no,
I'm going for this. I'm going to take a big swing and my team will score or we won't. But I really
liked that attitude from her. She is a true opposite in the sense that like she knows that
her role is as a point scorer and her team needs her to have that aggressive mindset. So she does
make a lot of errors, but the payoff was big for her team. I think for Texas and them to take a
step forward this season, they need to keep what they managed to do against Texas, but their left
sides are going to have to play a little bit better. Both Emily Helmuth and Taylor Humphries
struggled to score points. Yeah. The middles, as we said, stepped up. Let Nikki stepped up a little
more production from those left sides. And I think A&M can win some more tight matches. And I think
the teams that are learning to run the middle or are practicing running the middle in those situations,
I think that's going to pay down or pay off down the stretch. Well, and we'll talk about it later,
but pit case in point. Can we just talk about this one play that happened in the first set?
It was 25-25. Real tight. Texas runs out of subs. Okay. Texas runs out of subs. It happens sometimes,
you know, you have to make do. But what we ended up with was Akana on the left side,
a setter on the right side, and Madison Skinner was playing middle. We picked that up right away
when Texas went back to serve. My first thought in that situation would be like run the right side
or run the middle on a slide. You've got a DS in the front row. What did they do? They ran the outside
and Madison Skinner in the middle gets a stuff block. How, how are you not noticing that or being
mindful enough to take advantage of that? Not to say that Akana like maybe wouldn't have gotten a
block, but like let's play percentages here. As a coaching staff, that is on them, in my opinion.
Somebody needs to be picking that up and communicating to the setter. Players, you may
or may not be thinking about that or paying attention, but the coaching staff should have
brought that to their attention right away. It was crazy. You and I were looking at each other
like, wait, what? What? They set the left side. I mean, great job, Madison Skinner, middle blocker
getting that block. She is incredibly agile and athletic. That she is, but you and I were just
scratching our heads after that one. Yes, they're going to want that. If they had lost this match,
they would have wanted that one back. Oh dang. Texas has now lost every five set match they've
played this season. Time to be efficient for the rest of the season. Yeah, wins in three and four
only, baby. We're not going five again. Well, they need to learn to run the middle in long matches.
You can't just set the pins against good teams. Again, kudos to Skinner and Rutherford. I thought
they swung well. They made the most of the balls that they were getting, but I really hope Texas
works on those middle sets and setting those middles a bit higher this week because they could
be big assets. The match of the week this week and one that I think everybody who follows NCAA
volleyball is looking forward to was number one Pitt versus number four Louisville. You and I were
a little hesitant on whether or not to cover this match or not because we were covering Pitt just a
couple of weeks ago, but we were like, no, give the people what they want. We've got to talk about
this. I mean, you get covered when you're number one. That's just the way it goes. And a one-four
matchup, you can't pass that up. And the game definitely did not disappoint. It delivered.
And I will just say we saw a completely different Pitt team than we saw against SMU.
The first thing I noticed watching that match was Pitt came out with a, we're about to bully you for
this match and you better show up or we're going to roll you. And I loved that. They definitely
projected a lot of confidence. They had swagger and I'm here for it. That is the attitude that
you need as the number one team in the country and you're playing at home. It's like, we're going to
make a statement here. You're going to have to bring your A game because we're not messing around.
And they did not mess around. Let me tell you. Well, I thought the name of the game for me was,
I thought Pitt was consistent all the way through the match. They kind of played the same,
didn't give up a ton of runs and Louisville's performance was a little bit up and down. They
either played better or they were forced into a little bit of a box against those matches. And
they were the ones that had runs. Pitt was just Pitt and played the same way for five sets.
The way that Pitt was playing, they were just wearing Louisville down. They got production
from their left sides, from their right side, from their middles. Every weapon was working.
And it's like demoralizing when a team is just coming at you like that relentlessly. To Louisville's
credit, I thought they brought some serious service pressure. I thought they, for all intents and
purposes, those serves should have been causing issues, but Pitt's serve receive was just better.
It was outstanding. There's only so much you can do from the service line if the other team's
passers are feeling it. And if Pitt is in system, I'm sorry, they're the best team in the country.
They have the most balanced weapons. And I thought Fairbanks did a fantastic job
of distributing the ball. We were a little critical of Rachel Fairbanks against SMU.
And rightly so. During crunch time and when things weren't going so well, she completely vacated
setting the middle. But I thought the way that she ran the offense was outstanding and the
middles produced. I think the middles were the difference in that match, both offensively and
defensively. We're talking about 26 block assists for Pittsburgh and 24 for Louisville. There were
some stuff and stares in that match and I was all about it. In reading some comments about this match,
I was reading about a lot of trash talk. So I was like, okay, we did watch the match after the fact.
So I was like, let me check this out. Because I love some trash talk. You guys, it was not that bad.
Not at all. Not that bad. I loved it. You know what, if you backpedal a little slower or like
turn your head while you're screaming just a little slow, love that. Like I said, in episode one,
make them feel it. We're talking about a one-four matchup. These are two great teams who have
national championship aspirations. As a fan, you want to see the players care. You want to see them
celebrate a big block. I'm not saying everything goes and there's a certain line you can't cross
in terms of what you say across the net. But if you're going to go up and rip a kill against a
two-man block or shut somebody down, I have absolutely no problem with letting them know.
The classic move for me. The one that got a player in the most trouble, I would say, was Rila Jones
and Cressy josted at the net. And Jones won the jost and like threw Cressy to the ground. And as
Cressy's sitting on the ground, Jones is standing above her and is just running her mouth. The ref
had had enough at that point, so kind of called her out, gave her a yellow card. But you know what,
if I have to play you in the final four, if I have to play you in a national championship match,
I want you to remember. Absolutely. I want you to remember the last time we played each other
and how I stared you down when you were sitting on the floor after I just crushed you in a jost.
Absolutely. And let's be honest, a yellow card means nothing. I will say, however, I was disappointed
with Louisville's coaching staff. Leave it to the players. You got to stay out of it. Your job is to
be calm and collected, especially as an assistant coach. That's not your place. Yeah, the Louisville
coaching staff was getting pretty upset at the stuff and stares, the delayed turns. I agree with
you. Well, the other thing is De Beer wasn't as overt about it, but she shot some glances across
the net and has her own style of stare down. It may not be quite as aggressive, but don't kid
yourself. Oh, it was happening both ways. Absolutely. For sure. Absolutely. Now, the one thing I will say
is I thought Dani's use of the challenges was emotional instead of strategic. And I thought that
cost them to not have a challenge later on in the match. I think she used them both up and was
incorrect in the first two sets. And there were a few plays which I thought were challenge worthy,
where they just didn't have an option. I will give Dani credit. She listened to her team. She trusted
her athletes when the athletes were demanding a challenge or said that there was a touch or
whatever. She trusted them. So I can't fault her for that. I think that that's a good shows great
rapport between a coach and her athletes. But there were definitely moments in set three and set four
where there were challengeable balls that she just couldn't do anything about because she had been
wrong really early. So I agree that was a miss on Louisville's part. I was very impressed, however,
with Charity Looper and Alaina Scott in particular for Louisville. I would agree. I thought Looper was
incredible. I hadn't really seen her play up until this point. She is physical. She's dynamic. She's
got a quick arm. She sees the block, hits deep. She's very, very good. She was fun to watch.
She and her defensive ability. She picked up some balls. It was textbook. I thought Alaina Scott,
the libero, her setting was a thing to behold. I think she was the reason this game was that
close. If I had to pick an MVP for Louisville, I would pick her. She did the little things really
well. And between her and Looper playing defense, she extended rallies. She put hitters in a place
where they could hit the ball really well. She made some incredible covers. I thought she was
outstanding. She got her face taken off by Bree Kelly at one point. She didn't even touch it.
Didn't even blink. I have some respect for that. And you know what? She got bodied by a couple
swings by Pitt. Man, she was just stepping in. She's like, bring it. And you need a libero that's
going to have that attitude because, man, she could have been on the floor on some of those.
But she just took it and gave her team a chance. And I love a libero who can set. I think at the
highest levels, you need a libero who can deliver sets, especially out of the system. And her sets
were outstanding, like I said. The other thing that she probably won't get credit for is I thought
she was a calming influence on the floor in terms of running the serve receive, in terms of just
being stable and steady. And she's an emotional leader on that team from what I could see watching
that match. I did think that they needed to run their middles a little more. Agreed. Especially
because Pitt was just like coming at them. It was very easy to load up on the outsides for Louisville
because De Beer and Looper were scoring and were the most efficient scorers. I thought that Kara
Cressy did a good job when she got set, but I don't think she got enough balls. Yes, completely
agree. It's not like the middles weren't doing well. I just don't think they used them enough.
And I think they just need a little more production from the right side. Well, you could tell in the
third set, Reese Robbins scored very well and they were able to win. In the sets that they lost,
she was a little less efficient. They need to find a little more consistency from either her or that
position to really be a threat on both pins, especially if you're not going to run the middle.
On Pitt's side, Babcock had a great game. She is so dynamic. She hits the ball so high. I thought,
compared to how we saw her against SMU, so much better. She was struggling to find her rhythm with
her serve. So we did see Pitt employ the 6-2 to take her out of the serving rotation. There were
some times during the match where they were in that rotation four where Babcock should have been
serving and they ran the 6-2, but then they got stuck and they weren't able to get out of the
rotation and were giving up like a small run of points now and then. I'm curious why the coach
decided to stick with the 6-2 instead of allowing Babcock and Fairbanks to come back in because
Babcock is a weapon out of the back row. And Fairbanks was delivering the offense.
I completely agree with you. Take her out to serve if you need to and she was struggling,
but I would have gone back to them more quickly than they did in my opinion. The other thing I
will say, credit to Babcock, it's not always easy to keep your hitting rhythm going if you're
struggling from the service line like that. And I thought she did a good job of separating those
skills and being the offensive player that Pitt needed her to be. Because the other noticeable
thing was Torrie Stafford didn't have her best night. She only went 196 and she's season-high
hitter of 373 or average hitter of 373. And you honestly didn't notice. I think that's one of
Pitt's strengths. They have a ton of weapons and if somebody's not having a great night,
and let's be honest, 196 is not a terrible night, but it's lower than average and you have a team
that can step up in support in that regard where the load doesn't have to be on you.
That's what I think makes Pitt so good. The other thing is you just saw how united Pitt was as a
team. They were in it together and for each other and you could just see the eye contact they were
making with each other on after every single play. That type of team unity that you saw from that
match is something special and it's something that they're going to need if they want to win
a national championship. I'm just going to say it. If we see the Pitt team that played Louisville
show up in the NCAA tournament, Pitt is going to be the national champion. When they're working
like that and firing on all cylinders, I don't think anybody can touch them. There is one other
thing I want to bring up about this match. One player in specific, Kat Flood does such a good job
for this team. There was a stretch at the beginning where she came in, she served so well,
she made two digs, she set a great at a system ball, she gives them a rotation where they can
score points and put pressure on the other team's serve receive and she does it consistently. That
is a hard role to fill and kudos to her. I agree. She makes at least one positive action every time
she steps on the court. If Pitt can keep rolling and playing this way, they're going to be a tough
team to beat for anybody. That match was a lot of fun to watch. I love top 10 matchups but this one
it definitely delivered on everybody's expectations. Love to see a little fire,
love to see some sass and hopefully we'll be able to see more matches like this coming up.
Here's the time of the podcast where I get to put Sarah on the spot. I like to play games so I've
made up a new one and it's called fill in the blanks. I am going to make a statement. I'm going
to leave one word blank and we'll both play this one but you will start. Okay question one,
as Texas's coach I am blank about the loss to Texas A&M. Reflective? Question mark. I want a
little explanation. So one word and then an explanation. The reason I chose reflective is
because if you look at the stat sheet, the numbers are pretty close. So I think Jared Elliot's going
to have to look a little bit deeper into what went wrong here. Obviously when you're in the moment,
you're feeling emotion. So I think it's not an accident that Texas has won 80 in a row at home
during conference play. So there's something that the stat sheet doesn't show and so I think on
further reflection, you know, he might land on the setting issue and the fact that the ball was not
being bettered consistently. Mine's going to be along the same vein but my word would be frustrated.
Probably a better word. You were not good at a system setting and that wasn't on the setters,
that was on the team. I don't think either of your setters played particularly well,
didn't give your hitters much of a chance and so given that the game was so close
and in a skill that happens in every rally, you're not good at any of it, I would be frustrated
because I have to imagine they're practicing out of system setting on a fairly regular basis.
Blank team was left out of the top 16 rankings and deserves to be there. I'm going to have to
go with Arizona State on this one. Arizona State has been in the top 16, top 20 pretty much all
season and I understand the necessity to include big 12 teams in the top 16 ranking but I'm confused
as to why TCU and Utah were included and not Arizona State, especially because Arizona State
has been ranked higher than them all season. You know, I'm sure there's an explanation for that
but if I was Arizona State, I would for sure be asking questions. I'm going to go with Kentucky.
They've been ranked all season. They've only lost to teams that are ranked ahead of them,
minus one bad loss to Auburn and they've beaten SMU. So if I'm Kentucky, I'm holding on to this
snub and I'm coming out at the tournament with something to prove. A little competitive fire
through the net is blank for women's volleyball. Love this question. I may have teed you up on that
one. My word is necessary and I understand that I was definitely the player who was probably
looking through the net more than I should have been. So I'm biased. So take this with a grain of
salt because I definitely think it's a necessary part of the game because we're seeing women's
volleyball continue to grow and it's definitely having a moment. I think if the sport wants to
kind of continue on this trajectory, we need to be able to focus or get to know individual players
and we need players to be able to show their personality, their intensity, their competitiveness,
their ferocity in a non-judgmental way because right now so much of the attention in women's
volleyball is on individual teams, programs, institutions. We need to have that like
professional feel where like the fans love players and I think a good way to do that
is to introduce them to your personality and be allowed to show that. I'm going to pick exciting.
When I watch a player dominate in a sport, whether that's a block or a kill, I want to see that
emotion. I want to see them look across the net and care and I 100% agree that it's good for the
game and it's only the refs who don't like it. You can't tell me a fan didn't watch that game
and loved every minute of it. Well I'm sorry but when you're getting blocked and somebody's yelling
in your face you don't really love it either but like do it back. Here we go with the last one and
it's probably the hardest one. Blank is the most important player to their team and I'm going to
add a caveat to that. We're going to stay within the top four based on the rankings that just came
out. I'm going to go with Izzy Stark. Good choice. But hear me out. Hear me out, okay. I originally
was going to go with Jess Merzik because without her production, Penn State in my opinion goes from
a top team to like a middle of the pack team. She's just putting up crazy numbers for Penn State
and is carrying a massive load. But then that got me thinking, Penn State is not the most prolific
serve receive team in the NCAA. So last week we talked about how Izzy Stark is always bettering
the ball and it's like with Penn State's passing ability would Jess Merzik be put in the kind of
position she consistently is if somebody else was setting the ball? And I have to conclude probably
not. All that to say Izzy Stark is my pick. I have one that people are probably gonna maybe
not disagree with but catch them off guard. I'm gonna go with Elena Scott from Louisville.
Now this might also have a recency bias to it but I think that she does such a great job
of making the players around her better. She does it on serve receive where she's passing a ton of
court and she allows the left sides for Louisville to take less responsibility in that regard. She
digs a ton of balls, she extends rallies when the hitters get blocked and I think most importantly
she's a great out of system setter. So Louisville has a good big block, they get transition
opportunities and she's putting those players in a place to score. I think as a whole she makes her
team much better. Now I understand we left both Nebraska and Pitt one and two off that list
and I think part of that is Pitt is super well rounded. They have a ton of weapons and you saw
it with Torrie Stafford not having an amazing game but them still being able to hold it together. So
I think there's not one piece who's the most important on that team and Nebraska's super
skilled, really good serve receive, they serve tough. If I was going to pick a player for them
it would be the middle. Andy Jackson. Yeah I think she makes their players around her much better but
she's only on for three rotations so that's my reasoning with Elena Scott. I like it. I like
this game too. Let's keep this on the docket. We'll keep a rotation going. I got a few more
that we can try and then we'll pick which ones we like. Okay perfect. All right moving on. We got
one more segment left before we wrap it up and look at what's coming up next week. Time for the
hot takes. And I'm gonna go first and you can finish with this but my hot take is that the
national player of the year watch list has hit maybe four digits. I feel like every time I watch
a match we've added another five players to the watch list and I mean it's fine people play well.
I get it but let's be honest there's maybe 10 people who could win this award and I just think
I think it's ludicrous when I watch matches and it's always this player is the best in the
conference. This player is on the national watch list. Come on. No they're not. You're
allowed to have good games and play well and not be the best at something or everything.
I 100% agree with this hot take. I chuckle almost every match we watch and now it's just a running
joke when we're watching games. How many players in this match are on the national player of the
year watch list? Let's not kid ourselves. If you're not making a regional final you're probably
not winning national player of the year unless you are putting up Stacey Gordon circa 2004 numbers.
Okay. Did I age myself? Yes but I know some of you remember that. 7.5 something kills per
set. You can't deny that. So yes agree with your hot take. Mine? I'm curious what people think
about this one. My hot take is the new double touch rule in the NCAA is terrible. You guys I
am seeing at least once a match a one-handed tip set from not a setter and not from a pass that is
going over the net. I saw somebody tip set a ball from the 10-foot line. Like it's just it's just
getting crazy. It's it's getting absolutely wild. And the crazy part to me is our sport is called
volley ball. The act of volleying the ball is what the sport is named after and this is the skill
that is being butchered the most. My confusion with this is I thought they got rid of the double rule
not the lift rule. But they both seem to have disappeared. I agree with that too.
No I don't see lifts being called. I understand the rule you can't call a double on the first ball
over the net. Like that was historically the rule before this rule change. But like you can still
lift the ball and those aren't being called either. So this game I think this rule change is making
the game very sloppy. I think I say it at least once an episode. Let's keep track. I am a volleyball
purist. I literally say that every week. The beauty of the game, the set or as it was originally
called the volley is the title skill. It should be the most beautiful the most pure part. And right
now we are just seeing the ball corkscrewing through the air at all time. Like it's frustrating.
There should be an ugly threshold for a second contact in my opinion. Yeah can we have a
subjective threshold? I hate subjective stuff. But like I will make an exception for this skill.
This week is a little bit slower than last week. But we've still got some good matches coming up.
On Friday Nebraska is traveling to Wisconsin. So that will be a fun one as always. And on Sunday
the ACC has a couple of interesting matches. We've got Florida State, Stanford and Georgia Tech has
North Carolina. Arizona State is heading to Utah this week to take on BYU on Thursday. And they've
got the University of Utah on Saturday. So lots of exciting stuff happening and I'm very curious to
see how these matches play out. That concludes this week's episode of Volley Talk. There's always
something shaking in the volleyball world and we hope that 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'd leave us a five star
review. You can also find us on Instagram at VolleyTalk underscore podcast. If you have a
topic that you want us to discuss be sure to let us know by reaching out to us on Instagram or at
info at sarahpavin.com. Thanks so much for joining us and we'll be back next week.