1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:05,120
Hi volleyball fans and welcome back to Volley Talk, the podcast created for volleyball lovers

2
00:00:05,120 --> 00:00:11,680
who want to dig deep into what's going on in NCAA and international volleyball. I'm your host Sarah

3
00:00:11,680 --> 00:00:18,640
Pavin, I'm an Olympian, beach volleyball world champion, former Nebraska Cornhusker, and longtime

4
00:00:18,640 --> 00:00:24,320
pro both indoor and on the beach. And I'm Adam Schultz, former indoor player, international

5
00:00:24,320 --> 00:00:32,320
volleyball coach, and stats guru. Last week was upset week all over the Power 4 conferences and

6
00:00:32,320 --> 00:00:39,360
we also had a fan favorite match between Nebraska and Wisconsin in Madison. Let's get started.

7
00:00:39,360 --> 00:00:44,880
The week started off with Washington beating number 10 Oregon in five. This was just the beginning of

8
00:00:44,880 --> 00:00:51,520
the chaos that was going to ensue in NCAA volleyball this week. We had several players from

9
00:00:51,520 --> 00:00:56,880
Washington play really well. We had Keuni Fletcher hit four for the first time in the game and then

10
00:00:56,880 --> 00:01:04,880
we had the

11
00:01:04,880 --> 00:01:10,560
several players from Washington play really well. We had Keuni Fletcher hit 455. We had

12
00:01:11,280 --> 00:01:19,280
Kirsten Barton hit 333 and Julia Hunt hit 500. Those are some decent numbers. I found the most

13
00:01:19,280 --> 00:01:24,400
interesting part of that match was that Washington took the lead early in both the fourth and the

14
00:01:24,400 --> 00:01:29,360
fifth sets and never gave up the lead. It was a really strong performance for them at the end of

15
00:01:29,360 --> 00:01:37,680
the match. We also had number 13 Arizona State beat number 22 Utah Handley 3-0 and number 16 Georgia

16
00:01:37,680 --> 00:01:46,560
Tech beat number 25 UNC in a close five-set match. And now we get to the real shockers. On Friday,

17
00:01:46,560 --> 00:01:54,560
number five Stanford lost in five to Miami. We will talk about this briefly but they did recover on

18
00:01:54,560 --> 00:02:00,960
Sunday with a four-set win over number 23 Florida State. Both of these matches were on the road.

19
00:02:00,960 --> 00:02:07,360
The Stanford Miami match was very weird. The only thing I can say is that the top teams

20
00:02:08,080 --> 00:02:14,800
need to not go to five sets. They have to work to be efficient in three or four because you never

21
00:02:14,800 --> 00:02:25,760
know what's going to happen in that fifth set. You had Grace Lopez for Miami hit 407 on 54 balls

22
00:02:26,320 --> 00:02:32,480
in that match and I mean you were watching the blocking. What did you think? She was having one

23
00:02:32,480 --> 00:02:39,600
of those matches that nothing could go wrong. Honestly the five setters this season are the

24
00:02:39,600 --> 00:02:46,960
NCAA giant killers because like Grace Lopez was playing pretty well the whole match and then in

25
00:02:46,960 --> 00:02:55,520
the fifth set I'm watching this happening. Stanford has got a solid block in her face every time.

26
00:02:55,520 --> 00:03:03,680
They're getting great touches on these swings that just happened to go out. That just happened to

27
00:03:03,680 --> 00:03:09,920
catch their hand wrong. For all intents and purposes Grace Lopez should have been shut down hard

28
00:03:10,720 --> 00:03:16,400
on seven balls in the fifth set. And she scored on all of them. But she scored on all of them.

29
00:03:16,400 --> 00:03:25,040
They just missed the sideline or like Stanford's block was good. It was solid. It was set up right

30
00:03:25,600 --> 00:03:29,600
but it was just one of those games that you almost felt bad for Stanford because

31
00:03:29,600 --> 00:03:36,160
they had no business losing it honestly. Miami was out of system for 70% of the fifth set.

32
00:03:36,160 --> 00:03:43,200
I don't think I saw their setter set a ball inside of 13 feet the whole match.

33
00:03:43,200 --> 00:03:48,240
And I mean you have to give Miami credit where credit is due. They pushed the match to five.

34
00:03:48,240 --> 00:03:54,400
They did play well. They battled hard. They gave themselves a chance but that was Stanford's game

35
00:03:54,400 --> 00:04:02,720
to lose I thought. Okay. I don't like granted Miami was setting every single ball from like

36
00:04:02,720 --> 00:04:09,760
the baseline but their hitters know how to hit out of system. I will give them that. Fair. I will say

37
00:04:09,760 --> 00:04:15,440
you know they have a lot of international players who play for their national teams. You do see in

38
00:04:15,440 --> 00:04:22,320
the international game players tend to be a little more confident and adept at hitting those out of

39
00:04:22,320 --> 00:04:29,680
system balls and finding ways to score when they're in trouble. Those players for Miami they did that

40
00:04:29,680 --> 00:04:33,600
and I don't know if they're just in practice. To be honest I haven't seen them play. I don't know if

41
00:04:33,600 --> 00:04:40,560
they're in practice for hitting out of system if that's like the norm for them but they were

42
00:04:40,560 --> 00:04:46,640
fearless. They were taking big swings on uncomfortable plays so that was a positive.

43
00:04:47,360 --> 00:04:52,160
I could not help but feel bad for Stanford though because like Sammy Francis their middle she was

44
00:04:52,160 --> 00:04:58,400
she was virtually unstoppable on both sides of the ball. Correct. Offensively and from the blocking

45
00:04:58,400 --> 00:05:06,160
side she was outstanding. I did think Ilya Rubin was a little streaky like she had moments where

46
00:05:06,160 --> 00:05:12,480
she was just like flying high and was looking so good and then she would like make a couple weird

47
00:05:13,200 --> 00:05:20,640
errors in a row. Also it looked like they were playing in a high school gym. Stanford was

48
00:05:20,640 --> 00:05:28,160
ricocheting balls off of that ceiling like crazy. It's definitely a factor if you're not used to

49
00:05:28,160 --> 00:05:34,240
playing with a ceiling that low however it's probably something that by the end of the match

50
00:05:34,240 --> 00:05:41,120
you should have adjusted to. I don't it's not an excuse for them losing in my opinion. No I mean

51
00:05:41,120 --> 00:05:47,440
there is something to be said for playing in that environment often and being used to that like

52
00:05:47,440 --> 00:05:52,320
early in the match it definitely I think it did get better early in the match it was happening a

53
00:05:52,320 --> 00:06:00,160
lot but yeah all that being said like when I saw the result I was shocked that Stanford lost to

54
00:06:00,160 --> 00:06:06,240
Miami so I went and watched it and it was unfortunate because Stanford was doing the

55
00:06:06,240 --> 00:06:11,600
right things to be able to win and they got some really unfortunate bounces off of the block I

56
00:06:11,600 --> 00:06:17,760
thought. To me the takeaway after that match is hey we needed to take care of that match in four

57
00:06:17,760 --> 00:06:24,880
so that you have control of whether a player gets hot like nobody gets hot for 25 points you know

58
00:06:24,880 --> 00:06:29,840
so that would be my takeaway for Stanford. And that's the thing they had no business losing that

59
00:06:29,840 --> 00:06:36,960
fourth set. Correct. They were up 24 22 in the fourth and then it just they let the foot off the

60
00:06:36,960 --> 00:06:41,920
foot off the gas for just a second and then all of a sudden they're going back and forth to like

61
00:06:41,920 --> 00:06:50,480
what was it 30 28 or something. 31 29 yeah. Yeah so they should have finished it in four again you

62
00:06:50,480 --> 00:06:57,440
have to give Miami credit for making do and for like finding a way to gut it out but yeah that

63
00:06:57,440 --> 00:07:05,680
one was unfortunate. Number nine Texas is going through it ladies and gentlemen they lost both

64
00:07:05,680 --> 00:07:14,640
of their matches this week both of them at home both of them in five they lost to two unranked

65
00:07:14,640 --> 00:07:22,640
opponents in Missouri and Oklahoma they are now 0 and 5 in five set matches this season yet another

66
00:07:22,640 --> 00:07:30,400
example the ranked teams need to stop going five for their own safety. After the Missouri loss

67
00:07:30,400 --> 00:07:37,280
that was the first time that Texas had lost three home matches in a season since 2006.

68
00:07:37,760 --> 00:07:46,160
We're talking since your girl Sarah P that's me played that's a long time ago I couldn't even

69
00:07:46,160 --> 00:07:52,640
find any data on the last time they lost four matches at home in a season this is wild. You

70
00:07:52,640 --> 00:07:58,240
beat them at home in 2006 didn't you? Yes. I just I just thought I'd throw that in there.

71
00:07:58,240 --> 00:08:03,040
I mean I wasn't going to say anything but since you brought it up yes. And and I don't we don't

72
00:08:03,040 --> 00:08:07,360
need to get into the specifics of that match because we we looked at Texas in depth last week

73
00:08:07,840 --> 00:08:16,160
but to me it was a microcosm of the same issues they are relying on two players they're setting

74
00:08:16,160 --> 00:08:22,400
80 percent of their balls to those two players and don't get me wrong Madison is incredible

75
00:08:22,400 --> 00:08:29,360
she's playing really well she's the only reason they're in those matches but it's really hard

76
00:08:29,920 --> 00:08:35,920
to carry your team match in and match out especially when you go to five because that

77
00:08:35,920 --> 00:08:41,040
just allows teams to get a read on the setter the situation to find the timing on the block

78
00:08:41,040 --> 00:08:46,320
it makes your life really difficult. Literally nothing changed from last week to this week. I

79
00:08:46,320 --> 00:08:50,960
will say against Oklahoma it looked like they switched to a five-way tie.

80
00:08:50,960 --> 00:08:59,120
They switched to a five-one with Avery Carlson. Ella Swindle who was a starter on the national

81
00:08:59,120 --> 00:09:07,440
championship team last year did not play. I don't know if she was injured if that was you know a

82
00:09:07,440 --> 00:09:12,320
tactical decision to be like the 6-2 is not cutting it so we need to change something.

83
00:09:13,600 --> 00:09:20,080
Devon Kahahaua also didn't play I mean she entered every single set but I mean Rutherford is

84
00:09:20,080 --> 00:09:27,200
their go-to opposite. Madison Skinner's numbers against Oklahoma she hit 122 so I mean she had

85
00:09:27,200 --> 00:09:31,920
a lot of points but the efficiency she was making a lot of errors and actually against Oklahoma

86
00:09:32,720 --> 00:09:38,560
Texas was out blocked 17 to 10. So I think that kind of tells a story about the the errors

87
00:09:38,560 --> 00:09:43,920
offensively on Texas's side but like in the Missouri game which we did watch it really

88
00:09:43,920 --> 00:09:51,760
looked like Missouri's outsides the game plan was to just swing high seam every ball. They did not

89
00:09:51,760 --> 00:09:57,360
try to do anything else and Texas's defense didn't adjust. All they needed to do was slide

90
00:09:57,360 --> 00:10:02,080
their six back into the seam of the block they would have had double digit more digs over top

91
00:10:02,080 --> 00:10:09,440
of that block and their coaching staff just didn't make an adjustment. The six stayed in the same

92
00:10:09,440 --> 00:10:14,800
place I didn't see anything change in those matches and I was shocked. It was really disappointing to

93
00:10:14,800 --> 00:10:21,200
be honest and just hearing Jared Elliott's feedback after the Texas A&M loss last week

94
00:10:21,200 --> 00:10:29,360
his statement was oh we made too many hitting errors and it's like yeah no kidding Jared but

95
00:10:29,360 --> 00:10:35,040
like you're saying what the end result is like why aren't we examining the cause of that and like

96
00:10:35,040 --> 00:10:41,680
after we watched the Texas A&M match it was like your setting was not putting your hitters in a

97
00:10:41,680 --> 00:10:48,160
position to be successful. Sure you they were making a lot of errors but like you're fixating

98
00:10:48,160 --> 00:10:53,920
on the end result instead of like the process into what got you there and it just seems like

99
00:10:53,920 --> 00:10:58,960
that was a lot of number crunching instead of really looking over the game film and making

100
00:10:58,960 --> 00:11:03,840
the change that needed to be made because we saw it against Missouri nothing changed. So my question

101
00:11:03,840 --> 00:11:12,400
to you is the setter selection for the second match do you think that was message sending or

102
00:11:12,400 --> 00:11:17,520
do you think they chose the setter they thought would give them the best chance to win that match?

103
00:11:18,240 --> 00:11:24,560
Texas is in a position that they can't mess around right now so I think if it wasn't an injury

104
00:11:24,560 --> 00:11:30,240
decision I think it was a decision to try to be as successful as possible because honestly when

105
00:11:30,240 --> 00:11:36,160
we have been watching Texas Ellis Wendell is not connecting with the hitters at all with nobody

106
00:11:36,160 --> 00:11:43,200
it's been very strange to see so I think Carlson was their choice to try to get them a win because

107
00:11:43,200 --> 00:11:48,560
at this point they can't afford to make any more mistakes. And then in fairness to the setters

108
00:11:48,560 --> 00:11:53,520
they're only setting two rotations each they're leaving the right side in to set they're going

109
00:11:53,520 --> 00:11:58,480
through two rotations coming out that's that's a tough ask for a setter you have no chance to

110
00:11:58,480 --> 00:12:06,160
find a rhythm. Well Reagan Rutherford is serving and then she's setting. And I'm sorry her serve is

111
00:12:06,160 --> 00:12:11,280
not good enough she's not scoring that many points on her serve to not have a setter in there to run

112
00:12:11,280 --> 00:12:16,880
your offense I just that doesn't make any sense to me. My theory is that Ellis Wendell has the

113
00:12:16,880 --> 00:12:21,680
yips that's my theory because what there is no reason why you shouldn't be bringing your setter

114
00:12:21,680 --> 00:12:29,040
in to serve when Rutherford has like a pretty standard by the book jump float serve it's not

115
00:12:29,040 --> 00:12:35,600
like she's going up and hammering spin serves and getting aces so my theory is Wendell has the yips

116
00:12:35,600 --> 00:12:41,760
she's having trouble with her serve they're not sure what to do and here we are. So let's move into

117
00:12:41,760 --> 00:12:47,200
our feature matches for the week we're going to look at number 13 Arizona State beating number

118
00:12:47,200 --> 00:12:55,760
20 BYU in five and then because everybody wants it Nebraska crushed Wisconsin 3-0 so we'll talk

119
00:12:55,760 --> 00:13:01,280
about that even though I'm not sure how much there is to say. Yeah I don't think anybody expected that

120
00:13:01,280 --> 00:13:07,680
3-0 beat down but everybody loves that matchup so we're gonna dive in. We're gonna start off with

121
00:13:07,680 --> 00:13:14,000
Arizona State against BYU we haven't seen Arizona State play yet this year and since they're like

122
00:13:14,000 --> 00:13:20,640
among the top of the big 12 we wanted to check things out. BYU is a pretty hostile environment

123
00:13:20,640 --> 00:13:26,240
normally so we figured this would be a good test to see Arizona State play. Now I heard there weren't

124
00:13:26,240 --> 00:13:31,840
as many people there as they normally are. Too busy trick-or-treating. Well that's fair but I

125
00:13:31,840 --> 00:13:38,000
I really liked Arizona State as a team I thought they did a really good job. Argentina Ng the

126
00:13:38,000 --> 00:13:44,960
setter I thought she played really well I liked the offense that she ran. I thought Savannah

127
00:13:44,960 --> 00:13:53,120
Coleheed played incredibly well as a middle she hit 667 she was incredibly effective. I thought

128
00:13:53,120 --> 00:14:01,520
she blocked pretty well. I was impressed with Jelly Sear she didn't hit super efficiently in

129
00:14:01,520 --> 00:14:09,680
that match she was only 188 however she passes really well she hits out of the back row she

130
00:14:09,680 --> 00:14:15,360
plays defense really well and so kind of as an all-around six rotation player I thought she

131
00:14:15,360 --> 00:14:23,040
brought a lot of stability to that team. Yeah my ASU standouts were actually the Libero Mary Shroll

132
00:14:23,760 --> 00:14:30,480
the outside Jelly Sear and Savannah Coleheed as well. I agree with you I think Jelly Sear is like

133
00:14:30,480 --> 00:14:37,840
the perfect outside hitter number two the perfect ball control outside. The thing about ASU though

134
00:14:37,840 --> 00:14:45,520
is I don't think they have a true point scoring left side. And I think that's where Argentina Ng

135
00:14:45,520 --> 00:14:51,440
really impressed me was when you don't have a stud that you can set all the time how you run your

136
00:14:51,440 --> 00:14:56,080
offense in the position you put your hitters in is becomes more important and I thought she did a

137
00:14:56,080 --> 00:15:03,200
good job of that. I think when everything is in system ASU runs an incredibly fast offense.

138
00:15:03,920 --> 00:15:10,000
I agree probably the fastest that we've seen so far yeah and when things are smooth and in system

139
00:15:10,000 --> 00:15:19,040
Argentina Ng sets very well. I think as soon as the passes or the digs start to come off the net

140
00:15:19,040 --> 00:15:27,600
a little bit she tries so hard to maintain that tempo but she doesn't give the ball any shape

141
00:15:27,600 --> 00:15:36,000
which you need when you're moving off the net and you saw the balls kind of like die really early

142
00:15:36,000 --> 00:15:41,040
and the hitters were having trouble kind of like hitting those balls. I think when everything is

143
00:15:41,040 --> 00:15:48,960
smooth and all is good yeah she is setting outstanding but she's making life really difficult

144
00:15:48,960 --> 00:15:54,800
with that tempo she wants to run when things aren't perfect. Correct me if I'm wrong but that

145
00:15:54,800 --> 00:16:01,360
only happens to the left side. I feel she runs the the middle slide pipe pretty well regardless of

146
00:16:01,360 --> 00:16:07,360
the situation and I agree that the left side set is really fast when she's off the net. I'm also

147
00:16:07,360 --> 00:16:14,720
kind of confused about what they're doing with Argentina Ng their setter. They bring in their

148
00:16:14,720 --> 00:16:22,080
backup setter to be a serving specialist and a ds and in those situations I'm pretty sure it's an

149
00:16:22,080 --> 00:16:27,360
audible in the moment if Argentina Ng feels like setting or hitting and you could see some

150
00:16:27,360 --> 00:16:35,920
miscommunication at times as to who is actually setting and quite frankly the or Ng was not an

151
00:16:35,920 --> 00:16:42,080
efficient hitter. It's like a fun twist I guess keep people on their toes but like it's causing

152
00:16:42,080 --> 00:16:48,480
more problems than it's worth. That I agree with she was negative 111 on the attacks that she made

153
00:16:48,480 --> 00:16:53,600
and not having a system or understanding what you're trying to do I think just causes more

154
00:16:53,600 --> 00:16:58,880
confusion than it's worth. The other part is Roberto Rubella who comes in in the front row

155
00:16:58,880 --> 00:17:05,280
occasionally I thought played really well and swung you know 438 on the 16 balls that she hit.

156
00:17:05,280 --> 00:17:11,200
She was a good factor for that team when she came in. The Brazilian right side? Correct. Yes.

157
00:17:11,680 --> 00:17:16,640
I think she was pretty effective for them. Going back to what you're saying about the setter

158
00:17:16,640 --> 00:17:25,120
I think when ASU can run the middle they are very good when the middle is an option. Both Claire

159
00:17:25,120 --> 00:17:32,720
Jeter and Savannah Coleheed are outstanding. I think they were very difficult to stop but as

160
00:17:32,720 --> 00:17:38,720
soon as the middle becomes a non-option which is dictated by the pass or the dig that's when the

161
00:17:38,720 --> 00:17:46,080
wheels kind of fell off and the connection there between the speed set location etc it kind of fell

162
00:17:46,080 --> 00:17:51,120
apart. And I don't disagree with you on that I wouldn't say she's the best out of system setter

163
00:17:51,120 --> 00:17:57,120
but they were in system enough and I really liked her total distribution in terms of how she used

164
00:17:57,120 --> 00:18:01,920
her hitters and I mean no setter is going to be perfect at everything that's her weakness but I

165
00:18:01,920 --> 00:18:06,720
thought for the most part her distribution and the decision she made were quite good.

166
00:18:06,720 --> 00:18:12,560
I think overall though the story of the game came down to serve and pass. When we're looking at the

167
00:18:12,560 --> 00:18:20,320
serving numbers Arizona State had eight aces and 11 errors. BYU had only two aces and 13

168
00:18:20,320 --> 00:18:27,600
errors and I will say like as the sets were progressing it was very clear early which team

169
00:18:27,600 --> 00:18:34,480
was going to win the set because the passing would break down immediately and like the teams

170
00:18:34,480 --> 00:18:40,960
didn't really do a good job of recovering their side out or their serve receive ability like as

171
00:18:40,960 --> 00:18:46,400
the set progressed it was just like blocks of time where the passing just disappeared.

172
00:18:46,400 --> 00:18:52,320
Well and you saw it because once the fourth and the fifth set hit Arizona never gave up the lead.

173
00:18:52,320 --> 00:19:00,560
They were in control the whole time winning 25-14 and 25 or 15-7 in the fifth and BYU just couldn't

174
00:19:00,560 --> 00:19:07,280
they couldn't match them. In the fourth set they hit 0-67 and in the fifth set they hit 2-11 and

175
00:19:07,280 --> 00:19:13,600
Arizona was 300 and 300 plus in both of those sets they just couldn't keep up.

176
00:19:13,600 --> 00:19:23,520
I think another thing is that BYU is very very dependent on one hitter in Claire Little.

177
00:19:24,400 --> 00:19:30,720
I think early in the match she was almost unstoppable. She was hitting everything and

178
00:19:30,720 --> 00:19:36,320
I have a lot of respect for that because she wasn't being given great sets all the time but she

179
00:19:37,440 --> 00:19:42,240
she knows her role she knows her job is to score points and she was just going for it.

180
00:19:42,240 --> 00:19:49,040
She hits a heavy ball that Arizona State was having a really hard time controlling particularly

181
00:19:49,040 --> 00:19:56,080
early but I think Arizona State made a great defensive adjustment on her as the match progressed

182
00:19:56,800 --> 00:20:04,800
in that when Claire Little was getting set out of system the libero was dropping almost into

183
00:20:04,800 --> 00:20:12,640
the corner in position five and they had the off blocker the left side come all the way completely

184
00:20:12,640 --> 00:20:18,960
behind the 10-foot line. They were giving her a sharp angle because out of system Little was

185
00:20:18,960 --> 00:20:24,400
really hammering hard angle and they just couldn't cover it with just the libero but then when she

186
00:20:24,400 --> 00:20:30,720
was in system they had the libero come up and straddle the 10-foot line and the off blocker

187
00:20:30,720 --> 00:20:35,680
left side was coming in directly for tips and I think that that adjustment because they were

188
00:20:35,680 --> 00:20:42,160
playing her straight up traditional the same look no matter what the situation was early but that

189
00:20:42,160 --> 00:20:48,240
adjustment being able to identify when Little was in system versus out of system they got so many

190
00:20:48,800 --> 00:20:53,520
more chances on her and that was the difference I thought. And that's where I thought that jelly

191
00:20:53,520 --> 00:20:58,960
and the libero did a really good job being on the same page covering the court and getting chances.

192
00:20:58,960 --> 00:21:05,440
The other thing that Arizona State did was they served her a ton. She struggled to pass. They

193
00:21:05,440 --> 00:21:11,120
weren't aces but high around the attack line working for that out of system ball so that they

194
00:21:11,120 --> 00:21:17,520
could be in those positions and they came at her relentlessly. I will say middle blocker Brielle

195
00:21:17,520 --> 00:21:25,040
Camovore also played really well. I thought that she was a great offensive weapon for BYU too. I

196
00:21:25,040 --> 00:21:33,840
just think at this point in time BYU is a little one-dimensional and a little too reliant on Claire

197
00:21:33,840 --> 00:21:41,360
Little. Like that is a lot of weight to put on one player offensively. She does a great job. I think

198
00:21:41,360 --> 00:21:47,920
she's handling it well. She's scoring very well but she's getting over two times the amount of

199
00:21:47,920 --> 00:21:54,640
sets. I think during the broadcast we heard that she has had almost 400 more sets than the second

200
00:21:54,640 --> 00:22:01,440
highest attacker on her team. Well in this match she had 52 attempts and the next closest person

201
00:22:01,440 --> 00:22:09,040
had 28 who was Ellie Mortenson who I thought struggled in that match. For them to beat good

202
00:22:09,040 --> 00:22:15,520
teams she needs to be a weapon and she... Well her or the right side. Yeah she hit 107. It just

203
00:22:15,520 --> 00:22:20,880
wasn't good enough. Everybody knew when they needed a point who was getting set and that's

204
00:22:20,880 --> 00:22:28,000
that's a hard load to carry. I do want to give a shout out though to Hannah Billeter on BYU. She is

205
00:22:28,000 --> 00:22:35,120
one of the serving subs slash DS. When she's serving that is a great rotation for BYU. She

206
00:22:35,120 --> 00:22:40,960
doesn't always get aces but she's putting teams in trouble and I would say that that is their most

207
00:22:40,960 --> 00:22:49,600
efficient sort of defensive transition rotation and they're scoring the most points when Billeter

208
00:22:49,600 --> 00:22:54,720
is serving and I've noticed that across like multiple matches now. The other thing to remember

209
00:22:54,720 --> 00:23:00,080
is that I think BYU was very young so Claire Little is doing a good job of handling the pressure

210
00:23:01,200 --> 00:23:05,200
but I think as a team they will grow. BYU plays a lot of five set matches.

211
00:23:06,320 --> 00:23:10,560
They will get better as the season goes on and they'll be even better next year. I mean this was

212
00:23:10,560 --> 00:23:18,000
another example of a team that kind of recruited young high school kids versus a team that recruited

213
00:23:18,000 --> 00:23:25,120
from the portal and Arizona State has a lot of graduate students, a lot of upperclassmen,

214
00:23:25,120 --> 00:23:30,480
a lot of them from other schools. It was interesting. I think BYU definitely does have a bright future.

215
00:23:30,480 --> 00:23:35,760
It was good to see Arizona State play. I'm very very curious to see how they handle Kansas next

216
00:23:35,760 --> 00:23:41,600
week. That's going to be a fun match to watch. And it is fun to see how fast of an offense they run

217
00:23:42,160 --> 00:23:47,680
because it's faster than anything we've seen as we've said but like if they can just dial in that

218
00:23:47,680 --> 00:23:54,320
connection when the pass isn't there I think they they'll be a lot better. So now the match that

219
00:23:54,320 --> 00:24:00,320
everybody was looking forward to this week and while it wasn't a five set barn burner I still

220
00:24:00,320 --> 00:24:06,960
think it was a pretty good match overall. What were your initial thoughts? I would agree that the sets

221
00:24:06,960 --> 00:24:16,560
were good until about 20. It was very back and forth, super tight until we hit 20 points and then

222
00:24:16,560 --> 00:24:23,920
without fail around that mark Nebraska would score two or three in a row and and that was that.

223
00:24:23,920 --> 00:24:31,280
What did you see those runs after 20? Where did they come from? In at least two of the three sets

224
00:24:31,280 --> 00:24:40,400
they happened in the exact same rotation with Olivia Mouch serving. They got stuck with Lola

225
00:24:40,400 --> 00:24:47,120
Schumacher the freshman libero for Wisconsin in position one and Mouch was serving her line to

226
00:24:47,120 --> 00:24:56,160
line and there were bad passes, miscommunication, any number of things but it was that same rotation

227
00:24:56,160 --> 00:25:02,000
every time. One of the things that I noticed in the match was I thought that setter freshman setter

228
00:25:02,000 --> 00:25:08,640
Furbringer was struggling to connect with her middle hitters. They only had 13 sets in the middle

229
00:25:08,640 --> 00:25:14,000
and I understand that they ran Schmereck a few balls out of the middle but even still she wasn't

230
00:25:14,000 --> 00:25:19,360
effective and I thought that really cost them. It was really tough to run the middle because

231
00:25:19,360 --> 00:25:26,320
Wisconsin's passing was so bad. Fair. Like it was almost impossible to run the middle. The only

232
00:25:26,320 --> 00:25:32,400
thing they could do was set out of system and Sarah Franklin is the only player on Wisconsin

233
00:25:32,400 --> 00:25:37,840
who can effectively hit out of system and that became painfully obvious this match. Well,

234
00:25:37,840 --> 00:25:49,360
you had Schmereck hit minus 0.74 and watching her she needs to add a few more angles to her game.

235
00:25:49,360 --> 00:25:57,120
She hits the same. Straight. She hits straight often and while her height and the pace she can

236
00:25:57,120 --> 00:26:04,640
put on the ball gets her out of a lot of situations against Nebraska who's probably one of the best,

237
00:26:04,640 --> 00:26:11,280
if not the best defensive team in the country. It just wasn't good enough. No, it's very clear

238
00:26:11,280 --> 00:26:16,160
where Anna Schmereck is hitting the ball. If she gets her approach outside a little bit she's

239
00:26:16,160 --> 00:26:22,240
hitting deep angle and if her approach is inside the court she's hitting straight down the line.

240
00:26:22,240 --> 00:26:28,160
If she's coming into the middle she hits back to one. Like she does what she does and she's been

241
00:26:28,160 --> 00:26:34,800
able to get away with it because she's so tall but like you said when you've got a competent

242
00:26:34,800 --> 00:26:41,600
blocking and defensive team it's not going to cut it. You need to be more versatile. One of my

243
00:26:41,600 --> 00:26:48,400
favorite players on Nebraska and we talked about her before, Andy Jackson has hit 4.56 this season

244
00:26:48,960 --> 00:26:54,080
and whether it was the size of the Wisconsin block or the game plan she hit 1.18 this match.

245
00:26:54,080 --> 00:27:00,640
They still set her a whole bunch which I think they needed to but she was not effective. Well,

246
00:27:00,640 --> 00:27:06,160
nobody from Nebraska was effective except for Merritt Beeson. Not necessarily effective,

247
00:27:06,160 --> 00:27:13,120
efficient. But Nebraska is nothing if not balanced. I feel like they run one of the most balanced

248
00:27:13,120 --> 00:27:20,080
offenses in the country. I really think that this match was a blocking match. I agree with that. Both

249
00:27:20,080 --> 00:27:29,920
sides knew what the assignment was. I think both teams came in with a very clear plan. It was

250
00:27:29,920 --> 00:27:36,320
obvious that Nebraska wanted to stop Franklin for obvious reasons. She carries the load for

251
00:27:36,320 --> 00:27:42,960
Wisconsin offensively and Wisconsin wanted to make it as difficult as possible for Andy Jackson to

252
00:27:42,960 --> 00:27:49,680
get the ball. Because when Andy Jackson's an option there's just too much going on to be able

253
00:27:49,680 --> 00:27:56,960
to block and play defense effectively. So we saw Wisconsin serving to zone one a lot regardless of

254
00:27:56,960 --> 00:28:02,800
who was passing there to try to get Bergen Reilly kind of spinning and losing sight of her middle.

255
00:28:02,800 --> 00:28:11,920
And we saw Nebraska come at Wisconsin so hard on the serve particularly at Franklin or in the

256
00:28:11,920 --> 00:28:18,400
seam between Franklin and Orzull. I thought that the libero for Wisconsin also didn't pass

257
00:28:18,400 --> 00:28:23,760
particularly well and if Wisconsin was going to win this match she needed to be able to take court

258
00:28:23,760 --> 00:28:29,280
and keep them in system and that did not happen. I think it's just the passing issues that Wisconsin

259
00:28:29,280 --> 00:28:38,080
had just really highlighted how much they rely on Franklin because they don't have anybody else that

260
00:28:38,080 --> 00:28:44,880
can really score out of system as we mentioned. Smrec does what she does. She's not a great out

261
00:28:44,880 --> 00:28:50,960
of system hitter. You can't run your middle with the passes that were being delivered that match.

262
00:28:50,960 --> 00:29:00,960
And Orzull she was solid. She was steady for Wisconsin but it's a tough matchup her hitting

263
00:29:00,960 --> 00:29:06,320
out of system for an entire match. Yeah Orzull's the type of player who's going to be steady for

264
00:29:06,320 --> 00:29:12,800
you but she's probably not going to win you the match. Fair yeah. I do have to say I thought C.C.

265
00:29:12,800 --> 00:29:20,720
Crawford for Wisconsin blocked very well. There were runs of points there where she ran the show.

266
00:29:21,360 --> 00:29:28,960
You can tell that she's very smart, very intuitive. Her deductive reasoning is on point.

267
00:29:28,960 --> 00:29:35,840
You could just see her really taking care of business for Wisconsin from a blocking perspective.

268
00:29:35,840 --> 00:29:43,040
I thought she did amazing but it was just like a battle of the game plans and while nobody hit

269
00:29:43,040 --> 00:29:52,080
particularly well for Nebraska other than Beeson I thought that they backed up their solid blocking

270
00:29:52,080 --> 00:30:04,320
with good defense and their serving pressure didn't relent. Wisconsin they neutralized their

271
00:30:04,320 --> 00:30:09,520
hitters well. They got a ton of blocks. They kept everybody's hitting percentages down but they

272
00:30:09,520 --> 00:30:15,920
really loop hold themselves by not being able to get anybody going offensively. Well it's interesting

273
00:30:15,920 --> 00:30:22,960
you talk about the defense because Nebraska had 43 digs on the match and Wisconsin had 42 digs

274
00:30:22,960 --> 00:30:29,680
on the match but I think the difference and this is where sometimes stats can be deceiving is

275
00:30:29,680 --> 00:30:37,200
Nebraska controlled their defensive touches better than Wisconsin. They generally had two options for

276
00:30:37,200 --> 00:30:43,920
hitters instead of one option in transition and they did a better job of being able to put their

277
00:30:43,920 --> 00:30:50,160
hitters in positions to be successful I thought than Wisconsin and so while the numbers are close

278
00:30:50,160 --> 00:30:56,000
to equal I thought they had the advantage in that regard. And one criticism that I have had of

279
00:30:56,000 --> 00:31:02,640
Charlie Furbringer this season is her out of system setting. She's obviously young she's coming

280
00:31:02,640 --> 00:31:10,800
into her own she is a good setter but I think when she is forced to run around it's a little

281
00:31:10,800 --> 00:31:17,920
inconsistent and Sarah Franklin up until this point has done a really good job of just finding

282
00:31:17,920 --> 00:31:25,840
ways to score anyway. I think in this match Franklin looked out of rhythm her approach was a little bit

283
00:31:25,840 --> 00:31:33,840
slower her arm was a little slow it was almost like she was trying to see what was going to happen

284
00:31:33,840 --> 00:31:38,800
and she was thinking about her swing instead of just going for it. It wasn't the same Franklin

285
00:31:38,800 --> 00:31:45,840
that we saw and I don't know if that is just like respect for Nebraska or or what was going on there

286
00:31:45,840 --> 00:31:51,840
but I have said throughout the season that Furbringer struggles to set out of system consistently.

287
00:31:51,840 --> 00:31:57,200
And again I think that will come maybe with a little more strength I thought her all-around game

288
00:31:57,200 --> 00:32:03,440
was very good I thought she served well I thought she played defense really well but yeah I agree

289
00:32:03,440 --> 00:32:09,440
with your assessment that she struggled in those situations and Wisconsin both their passing and

290
00:32:09,440 --> 00:32:16,240
their defense were not always in control. Again I don't think the 3-0 score is really indicative

291
00:32:17,120 --> 00:32:24,640
of the match as a whole it was very back and forth like I said both teams had a very distinct

292
00:32:24,640 --> 00:32:31,680
and clear game plan and I think the players executed it well Beeson stepped up for Nebraska

293
00:32:31,680 --> 00:32:36,240
if she hadn't had those hitting numbers it might have been a different story it might have gone

294
00:32:36,240 --> 00:32:40,960
like four sets or even further and honestly Wisconsin needs somebody else who can be in our

295
00:32:40,960 --> 00:32:48,000
meta system. And I think that this is where Nebraska has the edge this season is that all of

296
00:32:48,000 --> 00:32:56,240
their outside hitters have the potential to have good matches it doesn't always happen but you've

297
00:32:56,240 --> 00:33:02,240
seen matches where they've individually gone off and the percentage chance that you know one one

298
00:33:02,240 --> 00:33:07,200
and a half two of them will have a good match is just higher than always relying on Franklin because

299
00:33:07,200 --> 00:33:11,760
Orzull like you said Orzull is not a great out of system hitter or not consistently going to score

300
00:33:11,760 --> 00:33:18,240
you those points and Schmreck when the defense is solid and has a good game plan she's not that

301
00:33:18,240 --> 00:33:24,880
player for you either. It'll be interesting to see how Wisconsin kind of regroups they are going to

302
00:33:24,880 --> 00:33:29,600
have a rematch against Nebraska later this month. Give me a prediction for that match.

303
00:33:29,600 --> 00:33:34,960
I think Nebraska is still going to win but I think maybe in four. That's what I was going to pick.

304
00:33:34,960 --> 00:33:41,440
I was going to say Nebraska in four. Yeah I do like seeing Beeson coming into the back row now

305
00:33:42,640 --> 00:33:47,120
and I do have to give a shout out to Lini Choboy I think she does a really good job for Nebraska

306
00:33:47,120 --> 00:33:52,960
whenever she comes in she gets at least a dig she brings energy she brings fire to the court for

307
00:33:52,960 --> 00:33:59,920
them I'm hoping the next time they play is a little better for a from a fan perspective the

308
00:33:59,920 --> 00:34:06,240
volleyball was good the game plans were solid I'm just a little more excitement you know.

309
00:34:06,880 --> 00:34:10,240
A little closer at the end. Yeah. Give me a couple two point sets. Oh yeah.

310
00:34:11,600 --> 00:34:16,400
All right it's time for my favorite part of the show. Adam makes up a game. I make up a game and

311
00:34:16,400 --> 00:34:21,600
Sarah has no idea what's going to happen and we see what she says so I'm going to go with

312
00:34:21,600 --> 00:34:28,720
what she says so this one is called Pavin's percentages. Oh I love an alliteration. I know

313
00:34:28,720 --> 00:34:36,960
you do. I am going to make a statement and you are going to give me a percentage that you think

314
00:34:37,920 --> 00:34:44,080
it will happen or come true. Okay. Okay. I will also give a percentage but after you. Okay. I like

315
00:34:44,080 --> 00:34:53,840
to play too. Okay. First statement a final four team will be playing a true 6 2. Oh.

316
00:34:55,600 --> 00:35:02,880
Oh dang. And let me clarify by true 6 2 I mean they're doing it pretty much that rotation

317
00:35:02,880 --> 00:35:09,600
every time. We're not just doing like a blocking sub double sub situation it's like every time.

318
00:35:09,600 --> 00:35:17,520
Yeah. Okay. I have not been loving teams 6 2 situation this year. A final four team will

319
00:35:17,520 --> 00:35:23,440
be running a 6 2. Louisville is not running a true 6 2 right. They're doing that double sub like

320
00:35:23,440 --> 00:35:29,600
once a set. Yeah I would say Louisville is not running a 6 2. Okay. I'm going to say less than

321
00:35:29,600 --> 00:35:35,200
10 percent. That's not good enough. I need a number. I think there is a 7 percent chance that

322
00:35:35,200 --> 00:35:41,520
a team running a 6 2 will be in the final four. I like that. I'm going to go with 16 percent.

323
00:35:41,520 --> 00:35:46,960
Oh dang. How can we measure this? We'll just see what happens. It's like every team in the final

324
00:35:46,960 --> 00:35:54,800
four is running a 6 2. You were absolutely incorrect. Okay. Do you have any anything to add

325
00:35:54,800 --> 00:36:00,560
or that's your that's your 7 percent. Just all the 6 2's that I've seen being run this season have

326
00:36:00,560 --> 00:36:08,400
been very disjointed. The hitters seem to have a really tough time getting in rhythm. The setters

327
00:36:08,400 --> 00:36:14,320
seem to have a tough time being in rhythm. It just has not looked good to me. I think there is

328
00:36:14,320 --> 00:36:22,160
something to be said about like hitters knowing what to expect. I don't like it. Okay. Simple as

329
00:36:22,160 --> 00:36:29,920
that. I don't like it. Sarah Franklin repeats as player of the year and here is a noteworthy

330
00:36:29,920 --> 00:36:36,160
stat that all of her numbers this year are better than last year. I know for a fact that that doesn't

331
00:36:36,160 --> 00:36:45,840
matter. I honestly don't think that Wisconsin will make the final four this year. It is very

332
00:36:45,840 --> 00:36:51,680
challenging. Like it's challenging to be named player of the year if you're not at the final four.

333
00:36:52,400 --> 00:36:58,000
Given the fact of who I'm thinking will be in the final four. Do you want me to hear what I'm

334
00:36:58,000 --> 00:37:03,760
thinking? Yeah. Okay. So I'm thinking if Pitt makes the final four, Babcock will be player of the year.

335
00:37:03,760 --> 00:37:10,400
If Penn State makes the final four, Mirzik has a good shot at being player of the year. I don't

336
00:37:10,400 --> 00:37:15,680
think anybody from Nebraska, well Andy Jackson would be the only pick for me for Nebraska.

337
00:37:15,680 --> 00:37:22,400
She's the real, they run, they're too balanced for one player to really stand out. And then Louisville,

338
00:37:22,400 --> 00:37:27,680
I don't think so. I think if Wisconsin makes it, she'll have a chance, but I don't think they're

339
00:37:27,680 --> 00:37:33,680
going to make it. So I'm going to say there is a 20% chance. That's really low, isn't it?

340
00:37:33,680 --> 00:37:39,920
It's actually playing the field. I think that's a high percentage. Oh, okay. I was going to say

341
00:37:40,960 --> 00:37:48,800
8%. I also don't think they're going to be in the final four. I think it's really hard

342
00:37:48,800 --> 00:37:56,800
to repeat as player of the year. And I, they're just not as smooth as they were last year.

343
00:37:57,440 --> 00:38:02,400
There's just like two, like for player of the year, there's so many variables that are out of

344
00:38:03,440 --> 00:38:09,440
your control. And, and you know, percentage wise with there being four digits worth of people who

345
00:38:09,440 --> 00:38:15,600
are on that watch list, I mean, her chance of winning is actually a 0.01% given all the people

346
00:38:15,600 --> 00:38:21,920
that are on the watch list. Nebraska goes undefeated for the rest of the season until the

347
00:38:21,920 --> 00:38:29,520
tournament. Now matches of note for them are Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Penn State. Honestly,

348
00:38:29,520 --> 00:38:34,640
I think they're going to win all of those matches. So I'm going to make it pretty high. I'm going to

349
00:38:34,640 --> 00:38:43,520
say there's a 70% chance that they will go undefeated until the tournament. Those are high odds. I was

350
00:38:43,520 --> 00:38:49,840
going to go with 51%. Oh man. Just over half. I guess I'm just confident in them. Oh, that's fair.

351
00:38:49,840 --> 00:38:58,160
So we saw Texas move to a 5-1 in their last match. What are the odds that they play a 5-1 for the

352
00:38:58,160 --> 00:39:08,880
rest of the year? I'm going to say 35%. Okay, I was going to say 49% only because I don't think

353
00:39:08,880 --> 00:39:13,840
they have any idea what to do in Texas right now. Because they have no idea what to do, I feel like

354
00:39:13,840 --> 00:39:18,160
they're going to go with something that the players are at least familiar with for the last little

355
00:39:18,160 --> 00:39:24,320
chunk of time. The players have played a 5-1 with Ella Swindle. They've only played one match with

356
00:39:24,320 --> 00:39:30,560
a 5-1 with Avery Carlson. I'm not sure if Swindle or Carlson started the season in the 5-1. That I

357
00:39:30,560 --> 00:39:37,040
didn't check. But man, I bet they are just reeling right now. They're in panic mode for sure.

358
00:39:37,040 --> 00:39:42,080
They're in panic mode for sure. Okay, now the last one. We kind of touched on this.

359
00:39:42,880 --> 00:39:48,400
And I wasn't sure where this conversation was going to go. But Wisconsin makes the final four

360
00:39:48,400 --> 00:39:56,960
was the last question. I think there's probably a 25% chance that they make the final four. I am not

361
00:39:56,960 --> 00:40:02,480
confident. This is not the Wisconsin team that we've seen in recent years. I was going to say

362
00:40:02,480 --> 00:40:13,040
33%. I think Franklin is capable of having two good matches to get them to the final four if her team

363
00:40:13,040 --> 00:40:20,960
can put her in a position to be successful. And it depends on their matchup. Correct. Because Texas

364
00:40:20,960 --> 00:40:28,560
is going to fall hard from that NCAA top 16 they came up with. But if we're using that as the

365
00:40:28,560 --> 00:40:35,200
reference point they would be playing Nebraska to get into the final four. Yeah, 33%. That NCAA top

366
00:40:35,200 --> 00:40:40,720
16 thing is not going to stand now. I think so many wacky things have happened that the NCAA is

367
00:40:40,720 --> 00:40:46,000
like, well that was fun. And you're going to get a new one next week. Yeah. Well that's the game

368
00:40:46,000 --> 00:40:51,680
Pavin's percentages. So I think we've played a few here now. So we'll have to see what we liked. If

369
00:40:51,680 --> 00:40:57,920
you guys have an idea or you want us to revisit one of these please let us know. Sarah will put a

370
00:40:57,920 --> 00:41:07,200
poll up. Oh, okay. Let's do it. It is time for our weekly hot takes. We're going to be a little more

371
00:41:07,200 --> 00:41:17,600
specific this week so get ready. My hot take is that Gulje Guchtiken, the DS for Wisconsin,

372
00:41:18,160 --> 00:41:24,080
should be the starting libero for the team over Lola Schumacher. She has only been playing DS

373
00:41:24,080 --> 00:41:34,080
this year. Honestly, I think with Guchtiken you get more leadership qualities. You need that position,

374
00:41:34,080 --> 00:41:40,880
needs to be confident, needs to be assertive, needs to basically run the back row. And you are

375
00:41:40,880 --> 00:41:48,240
not seeing that from Schumacher at all. You're seeing miscommunication. You're seeing her unsure

376
00:41:48,240 --> 00:41:54,960
of herself. Honestly, her passing is not good enough in my opinion for a team of Wisconsin's

377
00:41:54,960 --> 00:42:04,960
caliber. And we see Guchtiken digging in five when she's coming in, moving Schumacher to six or

378
00:42:04,960 --> 00:42:12,000
sometimes to zone one. If that doesn't say it, that just proves that Sheffield has confidence in her

379
00:42:12,000 --> 00:42:17,360
to be able to make those digs against certain players. Like I'm confused why Schumacher's the

380
00:42:17,360 --> 00:42:24,240
libero. And so that's my hot take for the week. Do you have an opinion? No, I mean I haven't watched

381
00:42:24,240 --> 00:42:28,960
them enough I would say to have a sample size but definitely in the Nebraska game I was kind of

382
00:42:28,960 --> 00:42:33,520
scratching my head and wondering why is this girl not playing more. I thought she did a great job.

383
00:42:33,520 --> 00:42:40,000
The only thing that popped into my head was I think she's a senior and she's a junior. She's a

384
00:42:40,000 --> 00:42:45,680
junior. Well and the thing is she's coming in as DS so she's playing half the amount of time as

385
00:42:45,680 --> 00:42:51,200
Schumacher. She had more digs in her and you're playing half the time. That's my hot take of the

386
00:42:51,200 --> 00:42:56,160
week. I'd be curious to know what the rationale behind that was. My hot take of the week is more

387
00:42:56,160 --> 00:43:06,000
of a surprise and... A surprise for yourself or a surprise for the listeners? Just overall surprised

388
00:43:06,000 --> 00:43:12,480
at how poor Texas has been and I know we've talked about them but my hot take is going to be...

389
00:43:12,480 --> 00:43:18,640
I don't think they get it back on the rails. Texas had eight days in between the A&M match

390
00:43:18,640 --> 00:43:26,480
and the Missouri match and we saw the same thing. No changes. And then they randomly go to a 5-1

391
00:43:26,480 --> 00:43:33,440
the next day with no practice. It's a band-aid solution. I don't think they know what the problem

392
00:43:33,440 --> 00:43:42,960
is and I'm not sure they're going to be able to fix it mid-season. They play too many good teams.

393
00:43:42,960 --> 00:43:49,040
It's a short window and now you don't know whether you're playing a 5-1 or a 6-2. I think they're in

394
00:43:49,040 --> 00:43:52,720
trouble. Well let us know what you think about these hot takes. We made them a little more

395
00:43:52,720 --> 00:43:59,680
specific this week instead of general. Like it, leave it. Either way we feel strongly about these

396
00:43:59,680 --> 00:44:04,960
ones. Give us your hot take. Looking forward we got a few matches coming up that we think will be

397
00:44:04,960 --> 00:44:10,320
great and you should keep an eye out for this week. On Wednesday Arizona State is hosting Kansas to

398
00:44:10,320 --> 00:44:18,720
see who will sit on top of the Big 12. On Thursday Nebraska travels to Oregon. We'll watch the scores

399
00:44:18,720 --> 00:44:24,400
on that one. I'm thinking Nebraska is going to roll there. So do I but like you love a ranked

400
00:44:24,400 --> 00:44:35,120
matchup. Fair. On Friday BYU and Utah have their in-state rematch after BYU took down Utah in five

401
00:44:35,120 --> 00:44:42,880
in Provo a couple weeks ago. I am feeling Utah for that match but we'll see where it goes. I have no

402
00:44:42,880 --> 00:44:49,920
idea. I think BYU gains extra superpowers at home so it'll be it'll be curious to see how they play

403
00:44:49,920 --> 00:44:55,920
at Utah but I think the BYU faithful will be traveling there for sure. So they usually travel

404
00:44:55,920 --> 00:45:03,280
pretty well. Yeah. On Saturday we've got Penn State and Wisconsin, Oregon and Minnesota and

405
00:45:03,280 --> 00:45:10,240
Stanford taking on Georgia Tech. It's going to be a great week. Hopefully not as messy as this week.

406
00:45:10,240 --> 00:45:16,320
The upsets were out of control. Well I feel like at the end of last week we said the upcoming week

407
00:45:16,320 --> 00:45:22,400
we said the upcoming week will not have that much going on. So the fact that we're expecting big

408
00:45:22,400 --> 00:45:26,880
matches we'll we'll see what happens. Yeah I thought this week was going to be so straightforward

409
00:45:26,880 --> 00:45:33,200
and it was anything but. So it's just like opposite day here. We'll see what happens.

410
00:45:33,920 --> 00:45:38,720
That concludes this week's episode of Volley Talk. There's always something shaking in the volleyball

411
00:45:38,720 --> 00:45:44,000
world and we hope you enjoyed this little fix. Be sure to follow the show so you don't miss any

412
00:45:44,000 --> 00:45:49,680
updates and we'd be so grateful if you'd leave us a five-star review. You can also find us on

413
00:45:49,680 --> 00:45:55,920
Instagram at VolleyTalk underscore podcast. If you have a topic that you want us to discuss be sure

414
00:45:55,920 --> 00:46:03,040
to let us know by reaching out to us on Instagram or at info at sarahpavin.com. Thanks so much for

415
00:46:03,040 --> 00:46:15,200
joining us and we'll be back next week. See you everybody.