WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.240
Hi volleyball fans and welcome back to Volley

00:00:02.240 --> 00:00:04.379
Talk, the podcast created for volleyball lovers

00:00:04.379 --> 00:00:06.620
who want to dig deep into what is going on in

00:00:06.620 --> 00:00:09.359
NCAA and international volleyball. I'm your host

00:00:09.359 --> 00:00:11.640
Sarah Pavan. I'm an Olympian, beach volleyball

00:00:11.640 --> 00:00:14.320
world champion, former Nebraska Cornhusker, and

00:00:14.320 --> 00:00:17.480
longtime pro, both indoor and on the beach. And

00:00:17.480 --> 00:00:19.660
I'm Adam Schultz, former indoor player, international

00:00:19.660 --> 00:00:22.440
volleyball coach, and the show's resident stat

00:00:22.440 --> 00:00:26.300
guy. NCAA women's volleyball season is officially

00:00:26.300 --> 00:00:30.949
over. Great weekend of volleyball played in Kansas

00:00:30.949 --> 00:00:34.770
City. Some matches better than others. So we

00:00:34.770 --> 00:00:38.329
are going to dive into all things NCAA Final

00:00:38.329 --> 00:00:42.990
Four. We have some loose ends to tie up in the

00:00:42.990 --> 00:00:49.030
NCAA space. But yeah, we are excited to get going.

00:00:49.450 --> 00:00:52.750
The holidays are upon us. It's a great time.

00:00:53.210 --> 00:01:08.040
So let's get started. Okay, first things first,

00:01:08.319 --> 00:01:12.219
men's club world championships happened this

00:01:12.219 --> 00:01:14.939
past week, obviously coinciding with the final

00:01:14.939 --> 00:01:17.620
four, so you know what we watched, the final

00:01:17.620 --> 00:01:22.120
four. But just a high -level overview, similar

00:01:22.120 --> 00:01:25.920
to the women, there were eight teams. So in pool

00:01:25.920 --> 00:01:31.140
A, Zawierce, look at that accent, from Poland

00:01:31.140 --> 00:01:35.859
won their pool. followed by Valle Renata, Praia

00:01:35.859 --> 00:01:40.700
Klubi, and a team from Qatar. So Zavirze and

00:01:40.700 --> 00:01:46.620
Renata moved on. In pool B, we had Perugia win,

00:01:46.879 --> 00:01:52.420
Japan, Osaka, Blueton second, Santa Cruzero third,

00:01:52.680 --> 00:01:56.900
and a Libyan team came fourth. In the semifinals,

00:01:57.200 --> 00:02:02.120
we had Osaka, Blueton took down Zavirze three,

00:02:02.590 --> 00:02:08.629
which surprised me. And Perugia beat Renata 3

00:02:08.629 --> 00:02:13.409
-0. In the final, Perugia beat Osaka 3 straight.

00:02:13.469 --> 00:02:15.949
It was a very decisive night, day, everybody.

00:02:16.090 --> 00:02:20.090
And then for bronze, Zaverze beat Renata 3 straight.

00:02:20.289 --> 00:02:24.530
3 -0, 3 -0, 3 -0. Yes, all over the place. Hopefully

00:02:24.530 --> 00:02:27.409
they sold one ticket for the whole day. Perugia

00:02:27.409 --> 00:02:31.669
won gold, Osaka took silver, and Zaverze took

00:02:31.669 --> 00:02:34.819
gold. bronze the perugia won champions league

00:02:34.819 --> 00:02:39.039
last year so they had a very good year the italian

00:02:39.039 --> 00:02:42.539
clubs the italian national teams 2025 was the

00:02:42.539 --> 00:02:46.460
year of palo volo okay forgive volleyball it's

00:02:46.460 --> 00:02:50.120
palo volo now men's and women's world champions

00:02:50.120 --> 00:02:54.229
for national team men's and women's world champions

00:02:54.229 --> 00:02:58.169
for club because scandici won women's so if you're

00:02:58.169 --> 00:03:00.449
italian it's great for it's been a great year

00:03:00.449 --> 00:03:03.250
if you're italian you're loving this if you're

00:03:03.250 --> 00:03:05.169
not italian and you just love great volleyball

00:03:05.169 --> 00:03:09.090
you're also loving this so huge congrats to perugia

00:03:09.090 --> 00:03:11.909
we'll be following the champions league discussions

00:03:11.909 --> 00:03:15.689
and what is happening as we get into the new

00:03:15.689 --> 00:03:20.590
year we also had the All -American teams named

00:03:20.590 --> 00:03:24.729
and the major player of the year, et cetera,

00:03:24.810 --> 00:03:28.250
awards. Okay, so I'm just going to say our predictions

00:03:28.250 --> 00:03:32.710
last week were true. I didn't have Jamie Morrison

00:03:32.710 --> 00:03:35.590
on my radar. I think you might have. I don't

00:03:35.590 --> 00:03:37.909
remember. I don't think so. Okay, just kidding.

00:03:38.289 --> 00:03:40.849
So Jamie Morrison from Texas A &M was named coach

00:03:40.849 --> 00:03:44.909
of the year. Let me ask you this. If they don't

00:03:44.909 --> 00:03:47.509
make the final four, does he get coach of the

00:03:47.509 --> 00:03:50.639
year? No. So this is for me. That's my issue

00:03:50.639 --> 00:03:53.240
with this. I mean, don't get me wrong. Jamie

00:03:53.240 --> 00:03:56.180
took a program. If there was a four -year award

00:03:56.180 --> 00:03:58.780
for Coach of the Year, he took these kids. He

00:03:58.780 --> 00:04:00.520
taught them how to be winners. They came out.

00:04:00.539 --> 00:04:02.039
They won a national championship. It's a great

00:04:02.039 --> 00:04:05.580
story. Coach of the Year, to me, should take

00:04:05.580 --> 00:04:09.080
into account not just the last week. I'm glad

00:04:09.080 --> 00:04:10.819
he won it. I'm glad he's getting recognition.

00:04:11.479 --> 00:04:14.960
Fully deserved for the body of work over, you

00:04:14.960 --> 00:04:18.519
know, again, four years. But in terms of just

00:04:18.519 --> 00:04:21.899
this year, that surprised me. We were on the

00:04:21.899 --> 00:04:24.939
Craig Skinner, Dave Shondell train. I understand

00:04:24.939 --> 00:04:27.500
why he won it. They did some amazing things,

00:04:27.699 --> 00:04:30.699
obviously. Good for him. I'm happy for him. I

00:04:30.699 --> 00:04:32.240
don't have an issue with it. I'm just saying

00:04:32.240 --> 00:04:35.980
it's that award out of all of them, to me, had

00:04:35.980 --> 00:04:39.620
a very big recency bias attached to it, which

00:04:39.620 --> 00:04:41.600
is fine. Freshman of the year was Cassie O 'Brien.

00:04:41.879 --> 00:04:45.399
That was my prediction after last week. Yeah,

00:04:45.439 --> 00:04:48.990
you were right. What is that? I don't think she

00:04:48.990 --> 00:04:51.209
played well in the finals. Again, we talked about

00:04:51.209 --> 00:04:52.310
it not being a residency award. But are we talking

00:04:52.310 --> 00:04:56.670
about a body of work? Yeah. I don't think she's

00:04:56.670 --> 00:05:00.910
the most talented freshman. I think she did a

00:05:00.910 --> 00:05:03.949
really good job being in a hard position as a

00:05:03.949 --> 00:05:06.149
setter as a first year with lots of expectations.

00:05:06.569 --> 00:05:09.889
And to her credit, she did improve. So I understand

00:05:09.889 --> 00:05:13.410
why she got it. I just don't think from a pure

00:05:13.410 --> 00:05:16.339
volleyball standpoint. She was better than a

00:05:16.339 --> 00:05:18.079
couple of the other candidates. Just my opinion.

00:05:18.720 --> 00:05:22.120
But do you think the other freshmen who didn't

00:05:22.120 --> 00:05:26.519
make the final four were that much better than

00:05:26.519 --> 00:05:29.040
her? Like heads and shoulders better than her

00:05:29.040 --> 00:05:31.660
to have earned that? Because she, in my opinion

00:05:31.660 --> 00:05:35.839
of the final four teams, is the one that is most

00:05:35.839 --> 00:05:38.480
deserving. I will agree with that for the final

00:05:38.480 --> 00:05:41.279
four teams. But that's kind of how, like, I understand

00:05:41.279 --> 00:05:44.120
what you're saying for the coach piece, but.

00:05:45.360 --> 00:05:48.360
I mean, if that if the recency bias applied to

00:05:48.360 --> 00:05:50.279
the players, too, we would have seen Kendall

00:05:50.279 --> 00:05:51.980
Storrs get a first team All -American. We would

00:05:51.980 --> 00:05:53.519
have seen Nikki get first team All -American

00:05:53.519 --> 00:05:56.660
and they didn't. Yeah, no, that's fair. And I

00:05:56.660 --> 00:05:58.519
again, I don't think the gap between her and

00:05:58.519 --> 00:06:01.860
some of the other freshmen like Suli Davis or

00:06:01.860 --> 00:06:05.339
who lost first round. Yeah. Again, I'm not I'm

00:06:05.339 --> 00:06:07.699
not really taking tournament performance into

00:06:07.699 --> 00:06:09.740
account there. I just I think that the other

00:06:09.740 --> 00:06:12.860
couple others were. better overall volleyball

00:06:12.860 --> 00:06:15.560
players, but she was in a really tough spot as

00:06:15.560 --> 00:06:19.300
a freshman setter, and she managed that incredibly

00:06:19.300 --> 00:06:22.199
well, to her credit. So, you know, if you put

00:06:22.199 --> 00:06:25.399
that in there, the difficulty that she was in,

00:06:25.480 --> 00:06:29.639
it is deserved. It's fair. And finally, National

00:06:29.639 --> 00:06:33.040
Player of the Year was Olivia Babcock. Even watching,

00:06:33.240 --> 00:06:36.439
I know they didn't win again, but she's just

00:06:36.439 --> 00:06:38.860
better than everybody else. She's better than

00:06:38.860 --> 00:06:41.300
everybody. Like, what are you going to say? No,

00:06:41.300 --> 00:06:46.019
nothing. Nothing. And she carried that team all

00:06:46.019 --> 00:06:50.220
season long. And we are going to dive into their

00:06:50.220 --> 00:06:53.379
match against Texas A &M here in a second. But

00:06:53.379 --> 00:06:57.500
you can't stop her. The only reason you could

00:06:57.500 --> 00:07:00.899
give it to Bergen if Nebraska won the Final Four

00:07:00.899 --> 00:07:03.699
was because her numbers in terms of her team.

00:07:03.920 --> 00:07:05.920
That's what I meant. Made the Final Four. Her

00:07:05.920 --> 00:07:09.370
numbers in terms of what her team. is something

00:07:09.370 --> 00:07:12.870
that you never see done. It was a historic hitting

00:07:12.870 --> 00:07:14.970
percentage. And you're not comparing apples to

00:07:14.970 --> 00:07:16.889
apples, so you can give her that nod. But giving

00:07:16.889 --> 00:07:20.310
any other hitter in the NCAA the award over Babcock

00:07:20.310 --> 00:07:24.189
is outrageous. If Wisconsin had won, I could

00:07:24.189 --> 00:07:26.250
have made a case for Mimi Collier to get it.

00:07:26.329 --> 00:07:29.810
If they had made the final. But once they didn't,

00:07:29.810 --> 00:07:32.129
it was like, okay, it's for sure. It has to be

00:07:32.129 --> 00:07:34.870
Babcock. And that's the thing. I think if Nebraska

00:07:34.870 --> 00:07:36.649
had made the final four, I think Bergen -Riley

00:07:36.649 --> 00:07:38.819
would have won it. Agreed. But the second they

00:07:38.819 --> 00:07:40.939
did and I was like, no, I think it's Babcock

00:07:40.939 --> 00:07:44.660
for sure. So that is what happened there for

00:07:44.660 --> 00:07:48.439
the All -American Awards on the first team. We're

00:07:48.439 --> 00:07:49.860
only talking about the first team. Otherwise,

00:07:50.079 --> 00:07:52.300
we know how Adam feels about Santa's laundry

00:07:52.300 --> 00:07:54.360
list of names that are on the website is just

00:07:54.360 --> 00:07:58.759
too long to get into. Nola Barrows, one setter

00:07:58.759 --> 00:08:02.300
and two medals. I honestly didn't expect any

00:08:02.300 --> 00:08:04.379
liberos to get it. We've talked about how it's

00:08:04.379 --> 00:08:07.180
like kind of a dry year or like a drought year

00:08:07.180 --> 00:08:10.480
in NCAA volleyball. But I think that that says

00:08:10.480 --> 00:08:13.819
everything. That is basically outside hitters

00:08:13.819 --> 00:08:16.540
or pin hitters. Getting all the credit. Getting

00:08:16.540 --> 00:08:21.079
all the credit. We're a little thirsty for some

00:08:21.079 --> 00:08:25.240
good setters here. Some good liberos. Or rather

00:08:25.240 --> 00:08:28.000
like that level of difference making liberos.

00:08:28.740 --> 00:08:31.500
But. The setter who made it, obviously, Bergen

00:08:31.500 --> 00:08:33.600
Riley from Nebraska. The two middles that made

00:08:33.600 --> 00:08:37.139
it, Ifeana Kosakpala from Texas A &M. Andy Jackson

00:08:37.139 --> 00:08:43.100
from Nebraska. Are there any names in the middle

00:08:43.100 --> 00:08:47.120
blocker, setter, or libero category that you

00:08:47.120 --> 00:08:50.860
think were snubbed? I think if Furbringer hadn't

00:08:50.860 --> 00:08:53.740
been hurt and missed time, I think she could

00:08:53.740 --> 00:08:58.139
have gotten a nod. I, after really watching...

00:08:58.279 --> 00:09:03.740
whack play she is not spectacular in anything

00:09:03.740 --> 00:09:07.799
and I mean that entirely as a compliment you

00:09:07.799 --> 00:09:11.899
don't notice her unless you really really pay

00:09:11.899 --> 00:09:14.960
attention to how she runs her offense which was

00:09:14.960 --> 00:09:18.179
incredible to watch so she was a 13 yeah that's

00:09:18.179 --> 00:09:21.059
again you really have to watch her to understand

00:09:21.059 --> 00:09:24.799
the value she brings to her team and having studied

00:09:24.799 --> 00:09:28.240
Texas A &M over the last couple weeks She is,

00:09:28.259 --> 00:09:31.759
it's a crime how underrated she is. Well, although

00:09:31.759 --> 00:09:34.279
we did say her, like, against, in the regional

00:09:34.279 --> 00:09:35.919
final, we were like, where the heck is her back

00:09:35.919 --> 00:09:38.480
set? She found it. Yeah, I didn't have any issue.

00:09:38.539 --> 00:09:41.279
I did not have that comment this week. So, I

00:09:41.279 --> 00:09:43.259
mean, I'm with everybody else. If you had have

00:09:43.259 --> 00:09:46.860
said Maddie Wack to me three weeks ago, I'd have

00:09:46.860 --> 00:09:50.340
been like, who? No, she doesn't, but man, she

00:09:50.340 --> 00:09:52.730
was outstanding. He played really well in the

00:09:52.730 --> 00:09:55.149
Final Four. Those would be recency bias included

00:09:55.149 --> 00:09:57.690
for WAC. Those would be two centers. Adam's not

00:09:57.690 --> 00:10:02.409
a fan of recency bias, but he also is. In this

00:10:02.409 --> 00:10:04.289
case, it drew attention to somebody who I think

00:10:04.289 --> 00:10:06.490
has been obviously good for that team for a while.

00:10:06.990 --> 00:10:10.230
Middle -wise, I mean, I think Rebecca Alec had

00:10:10.230 --> 00:10:12.269
a phenomenal season. I get why she's not on the

00:10:12.269 --> 00:10:15.830
list, but I think she was good enough. Maybe

00:10:15.830 --> 00:10:19.350
Cara Cressy would be a potential there, but those

00:10:19.350 --> 00:10:22.600
would be it. You? Rebecca Alec was second team.

00:10:23.240 --> 00:10:25.620
Lizzie Andrew from Stanford was second team.

00:10:26.000 --> 00:10:28.679
Kira Reinhart from Creighton was second team.

00:10:29.179 --> 00:10:33.080
Jayla Auguste, third team. Cressy was third team.

00:10:33.379 --> 00:10:36.539
Carter Booth was third team. So, like, we're

00:10:36.539 --> 00:10:39.440
talking some really good middles that didn't

00:10:39.440 --> 00:10:41.700
even get second team here. Yeah, and I mean,

00:10:41.759 --> 00:10:43.740
Booth was really good down the stretch, but they

00:10:43.740 --> 00:10:47.320
didn't use her enough. If she had received the

00:10:47.320 --> 00:10:50.480
number of sets that she got in the finals, I

00:10:50.480 --> 00:10:52.919
think she would have been much more on that radar,

00:10:53.019 --> 00:10:55.820
but she was just underutilized. I think in general,

00:10:55.899 --> 00:10:58.179
this was the year of the underutilized middle.

00:10:59.100 --> 00:11:02.559
Oh, there you have it. Trademark that. So the

00:11:02.559 --> 00:11:04.379
other athletes that made the first Team All -American

00:11:04.379 --> 00:11:07.759
list were Olivia Babcock, Mimi Collier, Brooklyn

00:11:07.759 --> 00:11:10.740
DeLay, Noemi Glover. How do you feel about Brooklyn

00:11:10.740 --> 00:11:12.779
DeLay being on that list? Do you think she had

00:11:12.779 --> 00:11:16.139
a great year? Yes. Okay. Laura Marie Heredia

00:11:16.139 --> 00:11:20.039
Colon, Eva Hudson, Malaya Jones. Kennedy Martin,

00:11:20.299 --> 00:11:24.399
Harper Murray, Elia Rubin, and Tori Stafford.

00:11:24.399 --> 00:11:26.600
I don't have a problem with anybody on that list.

00:11:27.279 --> 00:11:30.519
The one, and I think she got on just because

00:11:30.519 --> 00:11:32.980
of the conference she plays on. Noemi Glover

00:11:32.980 --> 00:11:37.360
was very good for her team. I could probably

00:11:37.360 --> 00:11:39.820
pick a few people from the second team list that

00:11:39.820 --> 00:11:42.600
I would have put ahead of her. But again, I think

00:11:42.600 --> 00:11:44.340
it's because of the conference that she plays

00:11:44.340 --> 00:11:47.490
on. When they won their conference. Correct.

00:11:47.529 --> 00:11:49.450
And again, I don't have anything. I really like

00:11:49.450 --> 00:11:52.389
her fantasy player for us. How well does she

00:11:52.389 --> 00:11:55.789
do in the Big Ten, you know, or in the SEC? I'm

00:11:55.789 --> 00:11:59.210
not entirely sure. So that was maybe the only

00:11:59.210 --> 00:12:03.029
question mark for me. If I had to pick any player

00:12:03.029 --> 00:12:04.929
that I was like, I don't know, it would be her.

00:12:05.090 --> 00:12:08.330
But honestly, I have no issues with this list.

00:12:08.669 --> 00:12:10.809
No, I think I think it's well done. And I think

00:12:10.809 --> 00:12:13.210
it just reflects that the strength in the NCAA

00:12:13.210 --> 00:12:15.330
was in the left sides and right sides of the

00:12:15.330 --> 00:12:19.080
season. If we're actually looking, the only liberos

00:12:19.080 --> 00:12:21.799
that made first, second, or third team were Rachel

00:12:21.799 --> 00:12:24.460
Van Gorp, who was second team. I believe she

00:12:24.460 --> 00:12:27.299
got ABCA Libero of the Year from Iowa State.

00:12:27.659 --> 00:12:31.740
Maya Sands was third team from Missouri. Molly

00:12:31.740 --> 00:12:36.659
Tuzzo was third team from Kentucky. It's criminal

00:12:36.659 --> 00:12:39.740
to me. Lola Schumacher did not get at least some

00:12:39.740 --> 00:12:43.399
sort of nod. She was outstanding this year for

00:12:43.399 --> 00:12:46.399
UCLA. But UCLA didn't really do anything. True.

00:12:46.600 --> 00:12:48.200
Fair. And I'm sure there's lots of players who

00:12:48.200 --> 00:12:50.120
are good for their teams. I thought she was spectacular.

00:12:50.539 --> 00:12:53.860
So, I don't know. I personally am totally fine

00:12:53.860 --> 00:12:56.659
with this list. Agreed. I think, yeah, the top

00:12:56.659 --> 00:13:00.980
14 players are the ones that are there. Even

00:13:00.980 --> 00:13:04.639
the player of the year lists, slight question

00:13:04.639 --> 00:13:08.019
mark on, as you're calling it, recency bias for

00:13:08.019 --> 00:13:10.779
Jamie Morrison. But, yeah. What are you going

00:13:10.779 --> 00:13:15.740
to say now? So... Let's dive into the final four

00:13:15.740 --> 00:13:19.679
matches. We are going to start with the semifinals

00:13:19.679 --> 00:13:26.179
and Texas A &M versus Pitt. Before we get into

00:13:26.179 --> 00:13:30.960
the specifics, tell me the way you watched that

00:13:30.960 --> 00:13:33.179
match and the way it felt. Did it feel like a

00:13:33.179 --> 00:13:36.100
three -set sweep? I mean, the sets were pretty

00:13:36.100 --> 00:13:41.659
close. Pitt had leads. They did. In at least

00:13:41.659 --> 00:13:44.139
two of the three sets. Watching it, it felt like

00:13:44.139 --> 00:13:47.399
a full team against one person. Let's go back

00:13:47.399 --> 00:13:50.100
and talk about what we thought the keys to success

00:13:50.100 --> 00:13:52.659
for each team were going to be. So we talked

00:13:52.659 --> 00:13:54.259
about Pitt having to get their middles going

00:13:54.259 --> 00:13:57.279
and having to have threats other than Babcock.

00:13:57.519 --> 00:14:00.100
That just didn't happen. The crazy thing for

00:14:00.100 --> 00:14:03.139
me watching that high level was that Pitt's middles

00:14:03.139 --> 00:14:06.200
were successful, really successful when they

00:14:06.200 --> 00:14:09.870
set them. And they just didn't. They got 14 total

00:14:09.870 --> 00:14:13.230
sets and they had nine kills. Babcock got 41

00:14:13.230 --> 00:14:16.970
sets. Bayless got 17 for 58. You can't do that.

00:14:17.009 --> 00:14:19.889
Everybody knew down the stretch when Pitt needed

00:14:19.889 --> 00:14:22.389
to score points where the ball was going to go.

00:14:22.409 --> 00:14:24.529
There was no question. No, which I think is fair.

00:14:24.789 --> 00:14:26.750
I think it's fair that everybody knows where

00:14:26.750 --> 00:14:28.889
the ball is going to go when the game's on the

00:14:28.889 --> 00:14:32.149
line. The only time Mosher ran the middle was

00:14:32.149 --> 00:14:34.309
A, when the pass was tight and she couldn't set

00:14:34.309 --> 00:14:36.490
anybody else, or when the pass was absolutely

00:14:36.490 --> 00:14:39.629
perfect, which didn't happen often. She wasn't

00:14:39.629 --> 00:14:43.149
taking any risks to set the middle at all. But

00:14:43.149 --> 00:14:44.809
I feel like this is what we've been talking about

00:14:44.809 --> 00:14:48.149
with Pitt all season. 100%. All season long.

00:14:48.559 --> 00:14:50.840
They made no adjustments from the start of the

00:14:50.840 --> 00:14:53.220
season till the end. And that's what we saw.

00:14:53.539 --> 00:14:55.799
Mosier just does not look comfortable setting

00:14:55.799 --> 00:14:58.179
the middle unless she's not moving. Anything

00:14:58.179 --> 00:15:01.500
off the net, no middle set. For me, this is a

00:15:01.500 --> 00:15:04.779
coaching error. We saw all four teams in the

00:15:04.779 --> 00:15:08.340
final four evolve as the season went on, in my

00:15:08.340 --> 00:15:11.120
opinion, except for Pitt. It just wasn't good

00:15:11.120 --> 00:15:13.500
enough. Babcock's incredible. She's by far the

00:15:13.500 --> 00:15:15.720
best hitter. If you always... Well, she almost

00:15:15.720 --> 00:15:19.440
did do it by herself. Yes. She almost did. That's

00:15:19.440 --> 00:15:21.480
the crazy thing. Because she's not just a great

00:15:21.480 --> 00:15:25.460
hitter. She's a really good blocker. Her defense

00:15:25.460 --> 00:15:28.950
has gotten so much better. Her serve. Not sure

00:15:28.950 --> 00:15:30.950
why she put the spin serve away. Agreed. Not

00:15:30.950 --> 00:15:33.529
a huge fan of her flow serve right now. The crazy

00:15:33.529 --> 00:15:35.909
thing is, is that even though they didn't change

00:15:35.909 --> 00:15:39.409
anything all season, except they were forced

00:15:39.409 --> 00:15:41.549
to, they were forced to bring Pazell in when

00:15:41.549 --> 00:15:43.190
the other left side got injured. That was the

00:15:43.190 --> 00:15:45.029
only change. But I mean, as far as a systems

00:15:45.029 --> 00:15:48.529
perspective, and she still almost managed to

00:15:48.529 --> 00:15:52.610
do it single -handedly. She hit 463. 22 kills

00:15:52.610 --> 00:15:57.140
on 41 sets and you hit 463. You can't ask. Anything

00:15:57.140 --> 00:15:59.440
more of a player than that, in my opinion. And

00:15:59.440 --> 00:16:02.159
she was not getting easy balls to score on. No.

00:16:02.240 --> 00:16:05.679
She was consistently hitting six feet off the

00:16:05.679 --> 00:16:08.480
net. Yes. In out of system situations, which

00:16:08.480 --> 00:16:11.700
is crazy considering your whole team has been

00:16:11.700 --> 00:16:13.419
setting her out of system all season. How are

00:16:13.419 --> 00:16:15.799
we not getting the ball closer to the net? And

00:16:15.799 --> 00:16:19.399
even Bayless, eight for 17, hit 353. Like those

00:16:19.399 --> 00:16:21.159
two players. Which I thought was crazy that they.

00:16:21.480 --> 00:16:25.139
The crowd. Yeah, anyway. The only thing. They

00:16:25.139 --> 00:16:28.440
did, while they were in control or in the matches,

00:16:28.460 --> 00:16:31.500
in the first two sets, they moved Babcock around

00:16:31.500 --> 00:16:34.799
to face Slidnicki for a couple times. Their adjustments

00:16:34.799 --> 00:16:37.259
were to put Babcock in places to make her more

00:16:37.259 --> 00:16:41.220
effective. Not anything I could determine based

00:16:41.220 --> 00:16:44.340
off the rest of the team. Even the game plan

00:16:44.340 --> 00:16:46.539
was centered around moving Babcock around, which,

00:16:46.600 --> 00:16:49.539
I mean, that's fine. You have the best player,

00:16:49.720 --> 00:16:53.500
but you need to put... Pieces in strategy around

00:16:53.500 --> 00:16:55.200
her. I thought there were many opportunities

00:16:55.200 --> 00:16:57.220
where Mosher could have ran a more effective

00:16:57.220 --> 00:16:59.519
middle or tried to push it. There's no reason

00:16:59.519 --> 00:17:03.659
Brie Kelly should not be utilized. She is a very

00:17:03.659 --> 00:17:06.700
good middle. She has the capabilities of scoring.

00:17:06.759 --> 00:17:08.420
I think she had one of the highest hitting percentages

00:17:08.420 --> 00:17:11.380
in the country last year when Fairbanks was running

00:17:11.380 --> 00:17:14.259
the offense. She's clearly capable. There is

00:17:14.259 --> 00:17:17.880
no reason. I feel like she was wasted. Yes, I

00:17:17.880 --> 00:17:22.269
totally agree on that point. Passed particularly

00:17:22.269 --> 00:17:25.430
well. I thought they were around or behind. Particularly

00:17:25.430 --> 00:17:29.130
their passing libero. Yes. I thought the liberos

00:17:29.130 --> 00:17:31.549
killed them in general. Both of them struggled.

00:17:31.910 --> 00:17:35.250
Not very good. And, you know, Moser was setting

00:17:35.250 --> 00:17:38.930
a whole bunch from at the attack line, straddling

00:17:38.930 --> 00:17:41.809
the attack line, slightly behind. But anything

00:17:41.809 --> 00:17:43.670
in front of the attack line, again, the middles

00:17:43.670 --> 00:17:45.869
needed to be a threat because you got the performance

00:17:45.869 --> 00:17:49.970
out of your star player that you needed to win.

00:17:51.240 --> 00:17:54.660
We came back to it. Eventually, if you just lean

00:17:54.660 --> 00:17:57.220
on one player in this sport, you're going to

00:17:57.220 --> 00:18:01.339
run into a full team who can take care of it

00:18:01.339 --> 00:18:04.660
and who can slow your hitter down enough to make

00:18:04.660 --> 00:18:07.839
it impossible to win. And I think I said they

00:18:07.839 --> 00:18:10.240
need to hold Babcock to under 25 points. She

00:18:10.240 --> 00:18:13.059
had 22 kills. She had more than 25 points. So

00:18:13.059 --> 00:18:16.019
what were the keys to success for A &M? You needed

00:18:16.019 --> 00:18:18.049
to be able to run the middle. and own the middle

00:18:18.049 --> 00:18:21.670
of the court, and they did a fantastic job on

00:18:21.670 --> 00:18:24.930
that, in my opinion. Their middles scored efficiently.

00:18:25.029 --> 00:18:27.970
They didn't get a ton of sets. They got more

00:18:27.970 --> 00:18:31.430
than the Pitt middles. But here's the thing.

00:18:31.670 --> 00:18:36.049
They were always a threat to score. Pitt's middles

00:18:36.049 --> 00:18:40.170
had to honor them all the time because they worked

00:18:40.170 --> 00:18:44.250
so hard to be there. Hats off to WAC. I thought

00:18:44.250 --> 00:18:48.569
she set an amazing game. Quite frankly, they

00:18:48.569 --> 00:18:51.970
ran overload. Sometimes they ran spread. Sometimes

00:18:51.970 --> 00:18:57.990
they ran their middles in front 51, 61, 31. Well,

00:18:58.069 --> 00:19:01.089
she ran with the flow sometimes and she ran against

00:19:01.089 --> 00:19:05.250
the flow sometimes. Like, yeah, she did a really

00:19:05.250 --> 00:19:08.589
good job and the, she was able to deliver speed.

00:19:09.450 --> 00:19:12.789
Yes. Pretty consistently. Yeah. And you saw.

00:19:13.400 --> 00:19:15.720
you know, they'd run the 31, they'd set the 31,

00:19:15.859 --> 00:19:18.099
then they'd run the 31 and they'd push it a little

00:19:18.099 --> 00:19:20.819
past to the outside hitter. Like Pitt's defense

00:19:20.819 --> 00:19:24.160
was just out of sorts. They didn't know where

00:19:24.160 --> 00:19:25.900
the ball was going to go because the middle was

00:19:25.900 --> 00:19:27.660
a threat. They didn't get set on the perimeter.

00:19:27.980 --> 00:19:30.039
They dug a lot of balls that they didn't get

00:19:30.039 --> 00:19:31.720
good transition opportunities on because they

00:19:31.720 --> 00:19:34.759
weren't set on defense. Like kudos to Texas A

00:19:34.759 --> 00:19:38.480
&M. They played incredibly well. But they had

00:19:38.480 --> 00:19:43.329
scoring threats legit from every position. The

00:19:43.329 --> 00:19:45.190
middles were scoring well. The Nikki was scoring

00:19:45.190 --> 00:19:48.250
well. Stowers was scoring, scoring well. But

00:19:48.250 --> 00:19:51.049
then you also have Helmuth who isn't typically,

00:19:51.150 --> 00:19:53.750
you know, the one you expect to score points.

00:19:53.789 --> 00:19:55.730
But when she got the opportunities, she was putting

00:19:55.730 --> 00:19:58.769
balls away. Perkins was official. Like they were

00:19:58.769 --> 00:20:02.390
coming at you and could rely on players in every

00:20:02.390 --> 00:20:06.369
single position. Absolutely. Led Nikki 14 for

00:20:06.369 --> 00:20:12.640
31 hit 323. Stowers, 16 for 30, hit 433. Helmuth,

00:20:12.759 --> 00:20:15.619
8 for 18, 222. And from your P2, that's good

00:20:15.619 --> 00:20:18.400
enough. If your P2 is hitting over 200, that's

00:20:18.400 --> 00:20:21.079
all you can ask of her. Well, and particularly

00:20:21.079 --> 00:20:23.759
when you're getting production from several other

00:20:23.759 --> 00:20:27.779
players. Yes, agreed. Everybody on the court

00:20:27.779 --> 00:20:30.950
was a threat. They set Perkins. They set... Kossak

00:20:30.950 --> 00:20:34.349
Paula, their distribution was perfect. And I

00:20:34.349 --> 00:20:37.410
want to spend a little bit of time talking about

00:20:37.410 --> 00:20:40.730
Jamie real quick. So he won coach of the year.

00:20:40.970 --> 00:20:44.950
And I don't know if this is, it's intentional,

00:20:45.069 --> 00:20:47.710
but I want to kind of point it out. He spent

00:20:47.710 --> 00:20:49.809
a lot of time in the international game, working

00:20:49.809 --> 00:20:52.970
on four -year cycles, developing players, preparing

00:20:52.970 --> 00:20:57.150
for one big tournament in the Olympics. And I

00:20:57.150 --> 00:21:01.480
find it fascinating. that with nine seniors who

00:21:01.480 --> 00:21:03.460
have been with him majority of the whole time,

00:21:03.579 --> 00:21:06.059
all of the sudden, and not all of a sudden, but

00:21:06.059 --> 00:21:09.119
gradually, you get to a point where everybody's

00:21:09.119 --> 00:21:13.839
playing well. Helmuth and Stowers, if you asked

00:21:13.839 --> 00:21:17.259
me at the beginning of the season, not a stellar

00:21:17.259 --> 00:21:19.880
outside core. I thought it was probably one of

00:21:19.880 --> 00:21:21.720
their weaknesses. Well, we watched them early

00:21:21.720 --> 00:21:25.140
in the season, and I think we were like, they're

00:21:25.140 --> 00:21:28.990
pretty good, but... Okay. But you're not talking

00:21:28.990 --> 00:21:32.910
about them in the top five outside cores, right?

00:21:32.990 --> 00:21:36.769
And Stowers, in my opinion, was the best player

00:21:36.769 --> 00:21:38.789
for Texas A &M. And I think she should probably

00:21:38.789 --> 00:21:41.009
win player of the tournament or whatever that

00:21:41.009 --> 00:21:44.910
award is called. MVP. MVP. She's been outstanding,

00:21:45.450 --> 00:21:49.250
in my opinion. Jamie. And just keep in mind,

00:21:49.250 --> 00:21:52.849
we are recording this segment before the final

00:21:52.849 --> 00:21:57.539
is played. Jamie. has put the work in to develop

00:21:57.539 --> 00:22:01.200
all of his players, at least who started from

00:22:01.200 --> 00:22:03.339
the ones that we've seen. There are improvements

00:22:03.339 --> 00:22:06.059
across the board, I would say probably other

00:22:06.059 --> 00:22:08.779
than LaNicki. I think she's been kind of the

00:22:08.779 --> 00:22:13.259
same. Well, we see almost the same team from

00:22:13.259 --> 00:22:15.839
last season that lost in the regional semifinal.

00:22:16.180 --> 00:22:19.220
You know, Helmuth was playing. Stowers obviously

00:22:19.220 --> 00:22:21.559
wasn't playing. She was medically retired at

00:22:21.559 --> 00:22:27.440
the time. Same middle, same setter. So we have

00:22:27.440 --> 00:22:31.160
seen in real time the growth of this team with

00:22:31.160 --> 00:22:32.859
the same players. And that doesn't happen by

00:22:32.859 --> 00:22:37.099
accident. So kudos to Jamie. Given how his team

00:22:37.099 --> 00:22:40.900
has stepped up and performed in the tournament,

00:22:40.980 --> 00:22:44.240
I think the coach of the year is deserved, even

00:22:44.240 --> 00:22:46.779
if it's a four -year build. They are playing

00:22:46.779 --> 00:22:50.099
incredibly well. I love their offense. I find

00:22:50.099 --> 00:22:52.119
it to be more of an international style offense

00:22:52.119 --> 00:22:54.099
where they have a lot of offense in front of

00:22:54.099 --> 00:22:56.920
their setter. They're running gaps in between

00:22:56.920 --> 00:22:59.759
blockers. They're running, again, 51s. They're

00:22:59.759 --> 00:23:02.039
making life very difficult. And you're not seeing

00:23:02.039 --> 00:23:05.259
the middles running off of one foot behind, which

00:23:05.259 --> 00:23:07.700
is what we talked about during the Nebraska match,

00:23:07.819 --> 00:23:10.819
which Nebraska should have considered doing when

00:23:10.819 --> 00:23:13.480
Jackson was struggling. Texas A &M isn't running

00:23:13.480 --> 00:23:15.680
any middle behind the setter. You know, you don't

00:23:15.680 --> 00:23:18.539
see that a ton, so it's harder to defend. So

00:23:18.539 --> 00:23:21.799
I think that that flavor and those adjustments

00:23:21.799 --> 00:23:25.900
really served them well. And they ran middle

00:23:25.900 --> 00:23:31.940
all match. 19 -19 ran a middle. 21 -20 ran a

00:23:31.940 --> 00:23:35.099
middle. And that's the thing is it doesn't necessarily

00:23:35.099 --> 00:23:39.000
have to be like every second ball. It just needs

00:23:39.000 --> 00:23:42.420
to be consistent. And like on Pitt's side, it

00:23:42.420 --> 00:23:44.339
was very predictable when the pass got really

00:23:44.339 --> 00:23:46.619
tight or when the pass was perfect. On A &M's

00:23:46.619 --> 00:23:49.289
side, it was just... A consistent, you know,

00:23:49.289 --> 00:23:52.210
trickle. Sometimes off the net, sometimes good

00:23:52.210 --> 00:23:56.190
passes. Sometimes they ran Cossack Polo on like

00:23:56.190 --> 00:23:59.609
a hybrid meter ball. Yeah. They're just to keep,

00:23:59.769 --> 00:24:02.029
and they don't run a good back row with their

00:24:02.029 --> 00:24:05.670
left sides. No. And so in order to do that. And

00:24:05.670 --> 00:24:07.609
I would argue that Nicky's not even great out

00:24:07.609 --> 00:24:10.009
of the back row. No, I agree. So that was how

00:24:10.009 --> 00:24:12.849
they managed to own the middle of the court in

00:24:12.849 --> 00:24:16.059
semi out of system positions was. Because Kasukpala's

00:24:16.059 --> 00:24:19.099
physical, she can do that. You're holding. Brilliant

00:24:19.099 --> 00:24:24.140
by them, in my opinion. Stowers, outstanding.

00:24:25.259 --> 00:24:30.680
Kasukpala, wow. Especially, like, she was scoring

00:24:30.680 --> 00:24:36.119
really well. Her serve, poof. Very nice. But

00:24:36.119 --> 00:24:40.319
her blocking. She is slowing down everything.

00:24:41.299 --> 00:24:45.259
And I love her movement patterns. Seeing what

00:24:45.259 --> 00:24:47.640
the other team's offense is doing and watching

00:24:47.640 --> 00:24:50.779
her, you know, decision, her movement patterns

00:24:50.779 --> 00:24:53.259
of like fronting the middle a little bit and

00:24:53.259 --> 00:24:56.380
reacting, her lateral movement is so efficient.

00:24:57.519 --> 00:25:02.279
I really like her. So you talked to me a little

00:25:02.279 --> 00:25:04.359
bit and I didn't hear this quote, but you were

00:25:04.359 --> 00:25:06.500
telling me somebody asked Kostik Polo before

00:25:06.500 --> 00:25:09.019
the match, how do you slow down Olivia Babcock?

00:25:09.059 --> 00:25:12.250
And what was her response? She's like, it's not

00:25:12.250 --> 00:25:14.589
even about Olivia Babcock for me. It's about

00:25:14.589 --> 00:25:17.730
us. And I literally got goosebumps because I

00:25:17.730 --> 00:25:22.049
was like, yes, if your team is taking care of

00:25:22.049 --> 00:25:25.150
your side of the net, Olivia Babcock is going

00:25:25.150 --> 00:25:28.970
to score her points. But if your team is working

00:25:28.970 --> 00:25:33.009
as a unit and everybody is just doing their job,

00:25:33.250 --> 00:25:36.970
that's all that matters. And I thought they did

00:25:36.970 --> 00:25:40.190
an outstanding job defending Babcock. She still.

00:25:40.700 --> 00:25:42.460
Was incredibly efficient. She's good enough.

00:25:42.460 --> 00:25:45.420
She's going to score those points. But what I

00:25:45.420 --> 00:25:48.619
thought was interesting was very rarely did she

00:25:48.619 --> 00:25:51.759
score clean points. There were touches. And she

00:25:51.759 --> 00:25:54.680
never had a one on one. Never had a one on one.

00:25:54.759 --> 00:25:57.559
And they got slowdowns. Not all of them worked

00:25:57.559 --> 00:25:59.539
in transition. You know, not all of them were

00:25:59.539 --> 00:26:02.059
good opportunities, but they defended the hard

00:26:02.059 --> 00:26:04.940
angle on her very cleanly with a solid block.

00:26:05.220 --> 00:26:09.400
They got touches. They made her life. More difficult

00:26:09.400 --> 00:26:13.019
than I've seen any team up to this point do that.

00:26:13.200 --> 00:26:16.500
And I think an intangible thing that I just really

00:26:16.500 --> 00:26:19.900
loved, aside from that comment, was just how

00:26:19.900 --> 00:26:24.240
genuinely excited the girls looked to be playing

00:26:24.240 --> 00:26:26.799
together on the court. And you could feel the

00:26:26.799 --> 00:26:29.200
excitement during timeouts, how excited the coaching

00:26:29.200 --> 00:26:33.859
staff felt. The atmosphere on the court and around

00:26:33.859 --> 00:26:38.240
the team was one of just pure... joy and excitement

00:26:38.240 --> 00:26:40.640
to be playing together. Jamie loves those girls.

00:26:40.940 --> 00:26:43.519
And they love each other. It was really cool

00:26:43.519 --> 00:26:47.539
to see. I thought serve and pass played a huge

00:26:47.539 --> 00:26:51.619
role. Again, you watched Texas A &M was generally

00:26:51.619 --> 00:26:54.200
passes where even if they were around the attack

00:26:54.200 --> 00:26:56.099
line, they were just in front of it, whereas

00:26:56.099 --> 00:26:59.200
Pitt's passing was just behind it, and that makes

00:26:59.200 --> 00:27:02.420
enough of a difference. Especially if your setter's

00:27:02.420 --> 00:27:06.599
not confident running the middle. while moving.

00:27:07.059 --> 00:27:09.500
And really the only serving threat that Pitt

00:27:09.500 --> 00:27:11.400
had, I thought, was Mosier, who's got a great

00:27:11.400 --> 00:27:14.220
serve, but you can't only be applying pressure.

00:27:14.799 --> 00:27:18.359
One out of six rotations? Yeah. With A &M's middles,

00:27:18.440 --> 00:27:21.900
the threat that they made them, Pitt needed to

00:27:21.900 --> 00:27:25.079
put more pressure on them from the service line

00:27:25.079 --> 00:27:27.920
to make their outside hitters a little more predictable.

00:27:28.059 --> 00:27:32.250
If they can get two blocks up, On the outside

00:27:32.250 --> 00:27:34.190
hitters, life becomes difficult, but they just

00:27:34.190 --> 00:27:36.450
couldn't do it. Particularly in that rotation

00:27:36.450 --> 00:27:39.970
when it's Stowers, Lednicki, and Cossack Paul

00:27:39.970 --> 00:27:42.630
in the furrow together. Yikes. Watch out. Who

00:27:42.630 --> 00:27:46.349
do you pick? And I didn't see Pitt make any adjustments

00:27:46.349 --> 00:27:49.309
other than panic switches in the third set. So

00:27:49.309 --> 00:27:51.130
in the third set, I think they switched their

00:27:51.130 --> 00:27:53.670
middles. They brought in Ryla Jones, you know,

00:27:53.670 --> 00:27:56.890
and then setter only two balls. They had a left

00:27:56.890 --> 00:28:00.009
side switch. They brought in... Gregoire. Yeah,

00:28:00.049 --> 00:28:02.569
they brought in Gregoire who played front row

00:28:02.569 --> 00:28:05.349
and it didn't seem purposeful. It seemed like

00:28:05.349 --> 00:28:07.849
changing something to try and get a different

00:28:07.849 --> 00:28:10.430
mix on the floor. Well, I love how before the

00:28:10.430 --> 00:28:14.269
game, the announcer was saying like Dan Fisher

00:28:14.269 --> 00:28:18.490
was like, oh, this is a new team. This is this

00:28:18.490 --> 00:28:20.569
team is so only half of our team have been here.

00:28:20.609 --> 00:28:22.490
Well, guess how many of A &M has been there?

00:28:22.630 --> 00:28:26.000
Zero. So the last thing I wanted to touch on

00:28:26.000 --> 00:28:27.700
with this match, you know, we've talked about

00:28:27.700 --> 00:28:29.039
the players, we've talked about the strategy

00:28:29.039 --> 00:28:31.200
is just, I don't even know if program philosophy,

00:28:31.480 --> 00:28:35.019
but Pitt has now lost five times in a row in

00:28:35.019 --> 00:28:39.240
the national semifinal. This was Texas A &M's

00:28:39.240 --> 00:28:44.599
first final, you know, speak to the mindset that

00:28:44.599 --> 00:28:47.460
you saw of the athletes and then maybe what Pitt

00:28:47.460 --> 00:28:51.019
needs to do next year to overcome this hurdle.

00:28:52.079 --> 00:28:54.880
I mean, you could kind of see not desperation,

00:28:54.940 --> 00:28:57.839
but a sense of urgency from the likes of like

00:28:57.839 --> 00:29:01.000
Olivia Babcock, who has now been there three

00:29:01.000 --> 00:29:04.019
times in a row. And you could just see her trying

00:29:04.019 --> 00:29:07.420
to like will the team to overcome this hurdle.

00:29:08.059 --> 00:29:11.039
On the A &M side, it was just like, I thought

00:29:11.039 --> 00:29:14.099
Jamie Morrison's pregame speech was like so good

00:29:14.099 --> 00:29:19.069
because being in that position. They could potentially

00:29:19.069 --> 00:29:21.369
have had the feeling like, do we belong here?

00:29:21.809 --> 00:29:24.970
And he just kept reminding them like, we are

00:29:24.970 --> 00:29:29.269
here. We are here. We're prepared. And if they

00:29:29.269 --> 00:29:31.549
are going to make great plays, but just remember

00:29:31.549 --> 00:29:35.490
like we earned our spot here. And I think like

00:29:35.490 --> 00:29:38.930
kind of going back to that and just that reminder,

00:29:39.170 --> 00:29:44.089
just let them play a little more free. Maybe

00:29:44.089 --> 00:29:47.109
they did have the underdog mentality and just

00:29:47.109 --> 00:29:48.869
were just like, we're just going to leave it

00:29:48.869 --> 00:29:50.369
all out there. We're just going to go for it.

00:29:50.450 --> 00:29:53.049
But you could see definitely a bit of tightness

00:29:53.049 --> 00:29:56.569
on the Pitt side. Just we need to finally get

00:29:56.569 --> 00:30:01.789
past this. Whereas it was more of a free, like

00:30:01.789 --> 00:30:07.269
joyful appearance on the Texas A &M side. Yeah.

00:30:07.329 --> 00:30:10.329
And I thought that that showed in the mentality

00:30:10.329 --> 00:30:14.000
of the Texas A &M hitters. they kept swinging

00:30:14.000 --> 00:30:16.500
for points and granted they did a great job covering

00:30:16.500 --> 00:30:18.900
their hitters when they got blocks like recycled

00:30:18.900 --> 00:30:21.799
i thought they were tenacious on defense but

00:30:21.799 --> 00:30:24.980
even when things didn't go their way they were

00:30:24.980 --> 00:30:27.799
playing to earn points no matter what especially

00:30:27.799 --> 00:30:31.339
i thought lidnicki who got many set ending sets

00:30:31.339 --> 00:30:36.109
and was forced to Be in compromise position,

00:30:36.289 --> 00:30:38.369
but still go for it. She got a lot of not good

00:30:38.369 --> 00:30:41.170
sets. I was impressed with how aggressive she

00:30:41.170 --> 00:30:44.170
stayed. And she didn't score on a lot of really

00:30:44.170 --> 00:30:46.910
important points, but she just kept going for

00:30:46.910 --> 00:30:50.029
it. Two things. Talk to me about Pitt. I think

00:30:50.029 --> 00:30:52.730
for me, it just didn't seem like they were thinking

00:30:52.730 --> 00:30:55.029
about what it would take to get over the hump

00:30:55.029 --> 00:30:57.569
early enough in the season. They were riding

00:30:57.569 --> 00:31:00.670
Babcock. They did that. I just think you have

00:31:00.670 --> 00:31:03.670
to be looking at when we play really good teams.

00:31:04.569 --> 00:31:05.950
Babcock's not going to be enough. And I don't

00:31:05.950 --> 00:31:08.450
know whether he talked to the middle and they

00:31:08.450 --> 00:31:11.069
tried and Moser just wasn't willing to do it.

00:31:11.150 --> 00:31:13.309
But I mean, I think everybody saw this coming.

00:31:13.410 --> 00:31:16.309
We've been talking about it all season. It just

00:31:16.309 --> 00:31:19.069
seems like they keep getting stuck in the same

00:31:19.069 --> 00:31:21.569
place and they keep relying on Babcock. And I

00:31:21.569 --> 00:31:23.869
know they've been here without her, but you need

00:31:23.869 --> 00:31:25.930
to be more of a complete team. I think that's

00:31:25.930 --> 00:31:28.730
what we're seeing in this playoff so far. Do

00:31:28.730 --> 00:31:30.789
you think they expected to make it this far after

00:31:30.789 --> 00:31:34.180
all the people they lost last season? Yes. You

00:31:34.180 --> 00:31:36.680
have Olivia. You have a shot to win. I think

00:31:36.680 --> 00:31:38.640
you need to take it like one match at a time

00:31:38.640 --> 00:31:40.579
and they play in a very strong conference. So

00:31:40.579 --> 00:31:43.720
it's not like they haven't beaten good teams

00:31:43.720 --> 00:31:47.759
with this system. I think it's not just about

00:31:47.759 --> 00:31:50.299
building so like we can win a national championship.

00:31:50.339 --> 00:31:53.559
It's about like, let's build so we can win our

00:31:53.559 --> 00:31:56.279
conference so we can do this. And they won their

00:31:56.279 --> 00:31:58.579
conference without having to really change much.

00:32:00.079 --> 00:32:01.920
It seems short -sighted to me. And it's not like

00:32:01.920 --> 00:32:04.799
you're trying to force bad middles. I'm not disagreeing

00:32:04.799 --> 00:32:07.440
with you. I'm like, given the personnel, like,

00:32:07.480 --> 00:32:09.480
do you think Purdue expected to make it as far

00:32:09.480 --> 00:32:11.819
as they did? No. I think with the personnel,

00:32:11.859 --> 00:32:13.920
I thought it would be a challenge for them to

00:32:13.920 --> 00:32:16.240
make it as far as they did this season. Granted,

00:32:16.240 --> 00:32:19.339
they had a really good year. They should have

00:32:19.339 --> 00:32:22.359
continued to evolve instead of just riding, doing

00:32:22.359 --> 00:32:24.880
the same thing over and over again. But they

00:32:24.880 --> 00:32:28.660
did. Yeah. I'm worried when Olivia leaves what

00:32:28.660 --> 00:32:31.839
happens. to that program if they don't have another

00:32:31.839 --> 00:32:34.660
stud because they're not playing team volleyball.

00:32:35.019 --> 00:32:36.720
I'm also very curious to see what happens with

00:32:36.720 --> 00:32:39.119
Texas A &M because they have nine seniors. What

00:32:39.119 --> 00:32:41.220
is that culture going to look like after they

00:32:41.220 --> 00:32:42.759
all leave and is Jamie going to be on another

00:32:42.759 --> 00:32:46.039
four -year cycle? I agree. I think Pitt could

00:32:46.039 --> 00:32:48.440
have done... And I don't know what their training

00:32:48.440 --> 00:32:50.779
with their setter looks like. I think they could

00:32:50.779 --> 00:32:52.819
have done more to get her confidence setting

00:32:52.819 --> 00:32:55.720
the middle in compromised positions. I think

00:32:55.720 --> 00:32:57.940
ultimately if they would have done that, I think

00:32:57.940 --> 00:32:59.839
they could have had more success, at least not

00:32:59.839 --> 00:33:02.599
gotten beat three straight. Agreed. But yeah,

00:33:02.660 --> 00:33:07.680
they were riding their producer all season long.

00:33:07.799 --> 00:33:11.440
And they ran into a team that was getting production

00:33:11.440 --> 00:33:13.039
from all sides of the net. They were able to

00:33:13.039 --> 00:33:16.819
slow her down enough. Okay, let's dive into the

00:33:16.819 --> 00:33:18.960
second semifinal. Which I thought was the much

00:33:18.960 --> 00:33:22.339
better game. Than the first one? Yes. Oh, absolutely.

00:33:22.859 --> 00:33:25.059
I mean, it went five, so that's already a start.

00:33:25.319 --> 00:33:28.940
Hit me with your initial thoughts. I honestly

00:33:28.940 --> 00:33:30.900
thought Wisconsin should have won. I thought

00:33:30.900 --> 00:33:35.240
they generally played better, in my opinion.

00:33:35.460 --> 00:33:38.319
I agree. I thought Herbringer set a good game.

00:33:38.420 --> 00:33:40.960
I was so impressed with Carter Booth. She's come

00:33:40.960 --> 00:33:44.140
on real strong in the last part of the season,

00:33:45.720 --> 00:33:48.960
during the tournament. Agreed. And Furbringer's

00:33:48.960 --> 00:33:51.460
finding her in all kinds of different situations.

00:33:51.900 --> 00:33:54.160
I mean, they went up 9 -2 to start. I think she

00:33:54.160 --> 00:33:56.339
ran the middle three times. Booth was great.

00:33:56.440 --> 00:33:59.220
She blocked well. Her leadership on the court,

00:33:59.480 --> 00:34:02.619
all of those things, I mean, that's exactly what

00:34:02.619 --> 00:34:05.680
you want to see from one of your leaders, senior

00:34:05.680 --> 00:34:07.880
or not. Yeah, I mean, I think earlier in the

00:34:07.880 --> 00:34:12.280
season, we saw Mimi Collier having to do the

00:34:12.280 --> 00:34:16.269
most offensively. Yes. I think even last year,

00:34:16.329 --> 00:34:19.369
one of our bigger criticisms of Wisconsin was

00:34:19.369 --> 00:34:21.670
how little they ran the middle. Yeah, agreed.

00:34:21.929 --> 00:34:25.050
But as they mentioned in the broadcast, Charlie's

00:34:25.050 --> 00:34:28.369
injury, I think, made it clear to her just how

00:34:28.369 --> 00:34:31.429
available Booth is. And since she's come back,

00:34:31.489 --> 00:34:33.789
I think their connection has been so good to

00:34:33.789 --> 00:34:38.150
have a middle scoring well in addition to Collier.

00:34:38.210 --> 00:34:41.090
As I said last week, I think Vajicic had a good

00:34:41.090 --> 00:34:44.250
tournament, so she was contributing, bringing...

00:34:44.519 --> 00:34:47.780
Trinity shed series off the bench for Vajicic

00:34:47.780 --> 00:34:50.800
in some circumstances to block. She was good

00:34:50.800 --> 00:34:54.340
for a couple points. We saw Sheffield dust off

00:34:54.340 --> 00:34:58.000
the old substitution booklet and try a few things

00:34:58.000 --> 00:34:59.739
in the tournament. So I wonder if he was just

00:34:59.739 --> 00:35:02.760
holding his cards all season. I mean, he obviously

00:35:02.760 --> 00:35:05.579
listened to our podcast. It was all a... I'm

00:35:05.579 --> 00:35:08.420
clearly kidding. So hold up. Don't get mad at

00:35:08.420 --> 00:35:10.639
me. He decided to work for his paycheck in the

00:35:10.639 --> 00:35:11.980
tournament instead of just sitting there and

00:35:11.980 --> 00:35:15.360
watching or what? We're Sheffield fans, FYI.

00:35:15.699 --> 00:35:18.420
Yeah, get your hands off that keyboard. You can

00:35:18.420 --> 00:35:21.340
put them away. I agree with you. I think Wisconsin

00:35:21.340 --> 00:35:24.119
was the better team. Two things I noticed. One,

00:35:24.340 --> 00:35:27.500
O 'Brien looked nervous. Which we talked about

00:35:27.500 --> 00:35:32.860
last week as being a possibility. Her set location

00:35:32.860 --> 00:35:36.320
and consistency, I want to make sure I caveat

00:35:36.320 --> 00:35:39.619
this. They weren't bad, but they weren't the

00:35:39.619 --> 00:35:43.019
same. And I think that's an important difference

00:35:43.019 --> 00:35:46.340
because it allows your hitters to find rhythm.

00:35:46.639 --> 00:35:50.099
And you're not fighting it all the time if it's

00:35:50.099 --> 00:35:52.019
always in the same spot. And I don't think she

00:35:52.019 --> 00:35:55.059
was bad. But again, you could tell the sets were

00:35:55.059 --> 00:35:57.840
not always in the same place, sometimes a little

00:35:57.840 --> 00:36:01.920
bit higher. She looked tight to me. It settled

00:36:01.920 --> 00:36:04.039
as the match went on, but definitely at the start.

00:36:04.119 --> 00:36:05.639
And the other thing was, I thought Wisconsin

00:36:05.639 --> 00:36:09.400
overdug too many balls. in the match as a whole.

00:36:09.559 --> 00:36:12.099
They were in good places, but they were always

00:36:12.099 --> 00:36:14.559
tight or slightly over the net. I think they

00:36:14.559 --> 00:36:16.780
wasted a ton of opportunities where they should

00:36:16.780 --> 00:36:19.300
have had good transition opportunities and didn't.

00:36:19.460 --> 00:36:22.559
They absolutely demolished Kentucky in the first

00:36:22.559 --> 00:36:24.480
set. Yes, it wasn't even close. It wasn't even

00:36:24.480 --> 00:36:26.780
close. Honestly, Delay looked on a different

00:36:26.780 --> 00:36:28.840
planet to me. Agreed. She did not have a good

00:36:28.840 --> 00:36:32.360
match. Did not have a good match. Could not find

00:36:32.360 --> 00:36:36.710
her rhythm. Just did not look herself. We talked

00:36:36.710 --> 00:36:40.349
about this very early with Kentucky in the season

00:36:40.349 --> 00:36:43.949
was O 'Brien, in my opinion, got the job because

00:36:43.949 --> 00:36:45.929
she could set Hudson better than their other

00:36:45.929 --> 00:36:48.289
setter, who I thought connected with DeLay better.

00:36:48.389 --> 00:36:51.829
So I don't think O 'Brien and DeLay had the best

00:36:51.829 --> 00:36:54.510
connection at the best of times. And when O 'Brien

00:36:54.510 --> 00:36:57.210
starts to struggle. Was that the case or was

00:36:57.210 --> 00:36:59.750
it the opposite? I'm pretty sure. I do remember

00:36:59.750 --> 00:37:02.170
us talking about one setter looked more comfortable

00:37:02.170 --> 00:37:04.650
with one and then O 'Brien looked better with

00:37:04.650 --> 00:37:07.460
the other. Almost positive it was O 'Brien with

00:37:07.460 --> 00:37:09.679
Hudson because it allowed Hudson to hit the line

00:37:09.679 --> 00:37:11.500
shot and her balls got out a little bit further

00:37:11.500 --> 00:37:13.380
if I'm remembering correctly. But it was that

00:37:13.380 --> 00:37:16.539
combination that allowed O 'Brien to start along

00:37:16.539 --> 00:37:18.619
with being a freshman in my opinion. I thought

00:37:18.619 --> 00:37:21.579
Wisconsin's serving strategy was very interesting.

00:37:22.320 --> 00:37:25.119
Not a tactic that we've seen many teams take

00:37:25.119 --> 00:37:29.639
with Kentucky. They were serving the back row

00:37:29.639 --> 00:37:33.320
not throughout the whole match. But it definitely

00:37:33.320 --> 00:37:35.480
became glaringly obvious to me at one point.

00:37:35.739 --> 00:37:38.159
They were serving the back row left side short.

00:37:39.360 --> 00:37:41.880
I just think it's a really good strategy. I was

00:37:41.880 --> 00:37:44.139
like, this is a really good idea. Because you

00:37:44.139 --> 00:37:49.159
see so many teams try to bury the front row passing

00:37:49.159 --> 00:37:52.500
left side. Not really serve them short. And they

00:37:52.500 --> 00:37:54.659
can still get out to attack. You still have the

00:37:54.659 --> 00:37:58.110
back row. But by bringing the back row. left

00:37:58.110 --> 00:38:01.829
side short it's not just a lateral move to get

00:38:01.829 --> 00:38:04.429
your approach anymore you have to move back up

00:38:04.429 --> 00:38:07.150
and so they were completely taking the back row

00:38:07.150 --> 00:38:10.789
left side option out which was great i think

00:38:10.789 --> 00:38:13.269
they were up six one in blocks at the beginning

00:38:13.269 --> 00:38:15.530
of that match and that was a direct result of

00:38:15.530 --> 00:38:17.949
not having to worry about the pipe yeah now it's

00:38:17.949 --> 00:38:21.469
just hey middle maybe kentucky doesn't run a

00:38:21.469 --> 00:38:23.530
ton of middle and o 'brien again i think as she

00:38:23.530 --> 00:38:25.809
got nervous ran the middle less and less And

00:38:25.809 --> 00:38:27.510
so they were loading up on the outside and having

00:38:27.510 --> 00:38:30.630
a ton of success with that. The other thing I

00:38:30.630 --> 00:38:32.769
will say is Kentucky's transition setting was

00:38:32.769 --> 00:38:35.510
atrocious. Oh my gosh. I was like literally taking

00:38:35.510 --> 00:38:38.369
mental stats all match. You guys know how I feel

00:38:38.369 --> 00:38:40.929
about Molly Tuzzo's jump setting. I wasn't only

00:38:40.929 --> 00:38:43.389
talking about Molly, but go ahead. Well, I have

00:38:43.389 --> 00:38:45.610
certain players that catch strays every episode.

00:38:45.650 --> 00:38:47.590
She is one of them in the setting department.

00:38:48.010 --> 00:38:51.750
Every single time she jump set, it resulted in

00:38:51.750 --> 00:38:54.349
the hitter having to tip. If it wasn't 100%.

00:38:54.940 --> 00:38:58.260
It was flipping close. 80, 85 % of the time.

00:38:58.280 --> 00:39:03.480
I was going to say 97%. I'm kidding. But it was

00:39:03.480 --> 00:39:07.019
really high. Like when she bumps it, good delivery.

00:39:07.159 --> 00:39:09.579
When her feet were on the ground, good delivery.

00:39:09.920 --> 00:39:13.400
When she jumpsets, it resulted in a tip every

00:39:13.400 --> 00:39:15.900
single time. And the announcer kept being like,

00:39:15.960 --> 00:39:18.699
great setter. And I'm like, yeah, when her feet

00:39:18.699 --> 00:39:21.039
are on the ground. Anyway. I'm going to point

00:39:21.039 --> 00:39:23.039
this out, though. She's one of those players.

00:39:23.099 --> 00:39:26.449
She looks. Great jump setting. Like, it looks

00:39:26.449 --> 00:39:30.050
pretty. It's flashy. You know what? Let's look

00:39:30.050 --> 00:39:32.030
at the result. Yeah. It's like, you know, the

00:39:32.030 --> 00:39:34.090
people who dive all over the court. We've been

00:39:34.090 --> 00:39:35.969
over this before. I'm not going to say it again.

00:39:36.150 --> 00:39:38.550
Now, I thought in the second set, Kentucky made

00:39:38.550 --> 00:39:40.869
some interesting adjustments. They started blocking

00:39:40.869 --> 00:39:43.329
Booth double in the middle, which I thought was

00:39:43.329 --> 00:39:45.989
a good adjustment. Well, especially because the

00:39:45.989 --> 00:39:48.730
Wisconsin right side is their weakest attacker,

00:39:48.969 --> 00:39:51.110
in my opinion. Correct. If Vajic is playing well,

00:39:51.190 --> 00:39:54.579
which she was. Yes, yes. And they started, Mimi

00:39:54.579 --> 00:39:57.059
Collier likes to do that deep roll shot when

00:39:57.059 --> 00:39:59.219
she's not feeling comfortable as an attacker.

00:39:59.440 --> 00:40:01.760
And they were sliding over and getting opportunities

00:40:01.760 --> 00:40:04.219
on her for that. So that was good. And in my

00:40:04.219 --> 00:40:08.079
opinion, Wisconsin lost the match in the second

00:40:08.079 --> 00:40:12.360
set. Okay. Because they were up and playing well.

00:40:12.679 --> 00:40:17.179
At 2019, Mimi had a back row error. At 2020,

00:40:17.460 --> 00:40:20.110
Furbringer. goes to the right side for whatever

00:40:20.110 --> 00:40:22.309
reason, and probably should have gone to the

00:40:22.309 --> 00:40:25.789
front court left side. And Kentucky went on a

00:40:25.789 --> 00:40:29.329
6 -0 run at the end of that set. I think if Wisconsin

00:40:29.329 --> 00:40:31.449
pulls that set off, they end up winning that

00:40:31.449 --> 00:40:33.610
match. And there was a couple decision -making

00:40:33.610 --> 00:40:36.510
issues, in my opinion, a couple execution issues.

00:40:36.849 --> 00:40:39.610
Kentucky made a couple plays. I will say Hudson

00:40:39.610 --> 00:40:42.550
found a way to score with what I thought were

00:40:42.550 --> 00:40:45.349
bad sets, and they just started rolling from

00:40:45.349 --> 00:40:47.840
there. To me, that set two was the key. I don't

00:40:47.840 --> 00:40:50.400
even think that they started rolling because

00:40:50.400 --> 00:40:54.219
the sets that Wisconsin won were, I think, much

00:40:54.219 --> 00:40:56.760
more decisive than the Kentucky sets. I will

00:40:56.760 --> 00:40:59.980
give it to Kentucky, though. They kept clawing

00:40:59.980 --> 00:41:06.139
their way out of difficulties, which is the mark

00:41:06.139 --> 00:41:09.880
of a really good team. I think Hudson, yes, started

00:41:09.880 --> 00:41:13.929
slow. I think she gradually found her way. delay

00:41:13.929 --> 00:41:16.530
for me was floundering the whole match she was

00:41:16.530 --> 00:41:18.730
better in the at the end of the fourth and the

00:41:18.730 --> 00:41:20.210
fifth set i actually thought that's why they

00:41:20.210 --> 00:41:23.050
won well they were up like what eight two in

00:41:23.050 --> 00:41:25.530
the fifth and then wisconsin brought it back

00:41:25.530 --> 00:41:28.610
top to bottom i think wisconsin played better

00:41:28.610 --> 00:41:32.929
and deserved to win kentucky just found a way

00:41:32.929 --> 00:41:35.289
i think that's the hallmark of this team there

00:41:35.289 --> 00:41:38.590
they were gritty hudson for the most part refuses

00:41:38.590 --> 00:41:41.900
to lose she keeps going and they gave delay a

00:41:41.900 --> 00:41:44.559
chance to score some points down the stretch

00:41:44.559 --> 00:41:48.199
when she needed to she was not good but when

00:41:48.199 --> 00:41:51.980
the set was there on the line she stayed with

00:41:51.980 --> 00:41:54.460
it after not playing well to score points when

00:41:54.460 --> 00:41:56.699
they needed her to and stayed engaged with her

00:41:56.699 --> 00:41:58.840
teammates and the thing there is a something

00:41:58.840 --> 00:42:01.800
that came up at 14 13 in the fifth and there

00:42:01.800 --> 00:42:04.639
was a timeout called and coming back the sideline

00:42:04.639 --> 00:42:08.500
reporter said That delay looked at Cassie O 'Brien

00:42:08.500 --> 00:42:12.000
at that point and was like, this is fun. Hell

00:42:12.000 --> 00:42:15.460
yeah, it's fun. Tight matches are fun, especially

00:42:15.460 --> 00:42:17.559
when like you have everything on the line and

00:42:17.559 --> 00:42:20.460
she was not playing well that match, but she

00:42:20.460 --> 00:42:25.860
had the wherewithal to know that her freshman

00:42:25.860 --> 00:42:28.980
setter was probably going through it. She was

00:42:28.980 --> 00:42:31.440
going through it, but she knew that she had to

00:42:31.440 --> 00:42:34.210
like. lighten the moment yeah lighten the moment

00:42:34.210 --> 00:42:36.849
and just like get her give her some perspective

00:42:36.849 --> 00:42:39.590
because like yeah playing in those high pressure

00:42:39.590 --> 00:42:43.329
environments when it's so tight is fun and I

00:42:43.329 --> 00:42:45.869
think that just speaks to like her leadership

00:42:45.869 --> 00:42:48.570
I thought defensively she was fine and I thought

00:42:48.570 --> 00:42:50.469
she passed well so even though the offensive

00:42:50.469 --> 00:42:54.789
portion of her game was not good you can tell

00:42:54.789 --> 00:42:56.789
when a player stays engaged because the other

00:42:56.789 --> 00:42:58.889
skills don't necessarily go down the tank either

00:42:59.239 --> 00:43:00.980
So I thought to her credit, she did a good job

00:43:00.980 --> 00:43:02.440
of that. But I want to read you these stats.

00:43:02.840 --> 00:43:04.900
Tell me if you think these stats are good enough

00:43:04.900 --> 00:43:10.000
to win a match. Your middle goes 21 for 30, hits

00:43:10.000 --> 00:43:16.480
633. Your P2 hits 286. Your P1 hits 348. And

00:43:16.480 --> 00:43:20.480
your second middle hits 455. 100 % yes. Those

00:43:20.480 --> 00:43:23.980
are Wisconsin's numbers on that match. That's

00:43:23.980 --> 00:43:27.050
a performance that you should win. You know,

00:43:27.070 --> 00:43:30.250
I would say it's disappointing for Wisconsin

00:43:30.250 --> 00:43:33.170
to have put up those numbers and for those individual

00:43:33.170 --> 00:43:36.170
performances to be good and to still not be able

00:43:36.170 --> 00:43:38.369
to pull it out. I mean, that's sport, but they

00:43:38.369 --> 00:43:40.829
played well individually and as a team. And Mimi

00:43:40.829 --> 00:43:46.489
Collier, I'm sorry, she's good. Yes. She was,

00:43:46.630 --> 00:43:50.409
she scores and keeps scoring and everybody in

00:43:50.409 --> 00:43:51.690
the gym knows where the ball is going and she

00:43:51.690 --> 00:43:56.750
keeps scoring and is ice cold too. match point

00:43:56.750 --> 00:44:00.309
she got set on a lot of Kentucky match points

00:44:00.309 --> 00:44:02.829
and she was putting the ball away like this is

00:44:02.829 --> 00:44:05.469
what we're talking about about as far as like

00:44:05.469 --> 00:44:09.789
a go -to hitter well and you look at it I actually

00:44:09.789 --> 00:44:13.889
thought Thigpen played a key role in in their

00:44:13.889 --> 00:44:16.150
winning because if you look at Kentucky's numbers

00:44:16.150 --> 00:44:19.210
Hudson played really well she was 29 for 55 she

00:44:19.210 --> 00:44:22.369
hit 455 that's outstanding and that's in like

00:44:22.369 --> 00:44:26.070
in addition to my sentiment of her starting Slower

00:44:26.070 --> 00:44:28.989
than usual. So she was really good down the stretch.

00:44:29.269 --> 00:44:34.690
But delay hit 160. Carr hit 125. Thigpen hit

00:44:34.690 --> 00:44:37.250
300. She didn't get a ton of sets, but she scored

00:44:37.250 --> 00:44:39.030
when needed to. And that's what you need. All

00:44:39.030 --> 00:44:43.110
the focus is on Hudson and delay. In a moment

00:44:43.110 --> 00:44:46.150
where one of those players falters, which happened,

00:44:46.349 --> 00:44:49.210
you need somebody else to step up, and she did.

00:44:49.449 --> 00:44:52.800
To me, the telling piece was down the line. Kentucky

00:44:52.800 --> 00:44:56.300
had three aces and nine service errors. Wisconsin

00:44:56.300 --> 00:44:59.079
had no service aces and 14 service errors, which

00:44:59.079 --> 00:45:02.000
isn't an outrageous number. But while they did

00:45:02.000 --> 00:45:05.699
have a serving strategy, which I agreed with,

00:45:05.880 --> 00:45:08.039
at some point you also have to put them under

00:45:08.039 --> 00:45:10.260
a little bit of pressure. I think the serving

00:45:10.260 --> 00:45:14.559
strategy got stale. I wasn't going to say anything,

00:45:14.760 --> 00:45:16.460
but that might have been. No, my heart broke

00:45:16.460 --> 00:45:20.920
for that girl because she was probably terrified,

00:45:21.179 --> 00:45:23.820
first of all. to go in in that environment as

00:45:23.820 --> 00:45:27.019
a freshman. And then for that to happen, the

00:45:27.019 --> 00:45:30.820
whole crowd was like, Ooh, my heart broke for

00:45:30.820 --> 00:45:35.360
her. That's on the ESPN top 10 list forever for

00:45:35.360 --> 00:45:39.079
her. That's, that's rough. Yeah. If you don't

00:45:39.079 --> 00:45:41.800
know, go back. Don't go back and watch it. I'm

00:45:41.800 --> 00:45:43.420
sure it's on YouTube. I think it was a word low.

00:45:44.179 --> 00:45:46.820
Adam's like, here's the timestamp. Check it out.

00:45:46.880 --> 00:45:49.639
I mean, I. She caught her toe on the floor. He's

00:45:49.639 --> 00:45:51.099
like, I wasn't going to talk about it, but I

00:45:51.099 --> 00:45:53.360
jotted down the timestamp in case anybody's interested.

00:45:54.659 --> 00:45:56.619
I actually had to go back on the broadcast and

00:45:56.619 --> 00:45:58.539
watch it again. I was like, what just happened

00:45:58.539 --> 00:46:00.619
there? I've seen it on the beach a lot, actually.

00:46:00.900 --> 00:46:03.119
Yeah, the sand shark is a real thing. I've never

00:46:03.119 --> 00:46:05.579
seen the cork shark. Came out of that Teraflex

00:46:05.579 --> 00:46:08.400
looking for some ankles. I thoroughly enjoyed

00:46:08.400 --> 00:46:12.130
watching that match. I thought... There were

00:46:12.130 --> 00:46:14.510
interesting adjustments back and forth. It was

00:46:14.510 --> 00:46:16.929
a good coach's battle. It was a good player's

00:46:16.929 --> 00:46:18.889
battle. You saw the players for the most part

00:46:18.889 --> 00:46:21.269
perform, you know, other than delay, but she

00:46:21.269 --> 00:46:25.190
played well at the end. I do think as a team,

00:46:25.469 --> 00:46:27.269
you know, with Booth playing the way she did

00:46:27.269 --> 00:46:30.429
in the middle, Egan and Vajicic stepping up,

00:46:30.530 --> 00:46:33.170
I think Wisconsin, if there was a desirable meter

00:46:33.170 --> 00:46:35.710
in terms of watching volleyball, that Wisconsin

00:46:35.710 --> 00:46:39.110
should have won that match and Kentucky actually.

00:46:39.719 --> 00:46:42.440
squeaked it out you know off of Hudson's play

00:46:42.440 --> 00:46:45.400
for the most part all right our last match of

00:46:45.400 --> 00:46:49.219
the season weekend final four however you want

00:46:49.219 --> 00:46:53.239
to cut it was Texas disappointing well Texas

00:46:53.239 --> 00:46:56.480
A &M versus Kentucky I mean unless you're Texas

00:46:56.480 --> 00:46:59.079
A &M that was not a good volleyball match no

00:46:59.079 --> 00:47:02.559
from an entertainment perspective I found it

00:47:02.559 --> 00:47:06.139
very underwhelming I was really disappointed

00:47:06.960 --> 00:47:10.239
In the Kentucky team that showed up, I had them

00:47:10.239 --> 00:47:12.119
winning my whole bracket, okay? And then they

00:47:12.119 --> 00:47:15.880
go and get swept. Give me a break. I mean, no

00:47:15.880 --> 00:47:17.780
disrespect in this comment, but when Thigpen

00:47:17.780 --> 00:47:21.179
is your best player, you're probably not going

00:47:21.179 --> 00:47:24.659
to win. And she, to her credit, was the best

00:47:24.659 --> 00:47:27.699
one for Kentucky. Well, it was just like they

00:47:27.699 --> 00:47:30.139
were so dominant for like 15 points, and then

00:47:30.139 --> 00:47:33.460
it was like they disappeared, and A &M was like,

00:47:33.539 --> 00:47:37.139
yeah, we're just going to steamroll you. It was

00:47:37.139 --> 00:47:42.079
honestly embarrassing. Once Texas A &M beat Nebraska

00:47:42.079 --> 00:47:46.760
and gained confidence, I think they truly believed

00:47:46.760 --> 00:47:50.920
they could win. And they were really hard to

00:47:50.920 --> 00:47:53.420
stop after that. Now, they were a little blinded

00:47:53.420 --> 00:47:54.980
by the lights at the beginning of that first

00:47:54.980 --> 00:47:58.500
set, I thought. But man, Jamie did a good job

00:47:58.500 --> 00:48:00.719
of righting the ship and bringing them back in.

00:48:00.780 --> 00:48:05.940
I think they were down 13 -7 to Kentucky. And

00:48:05.940 --> 00:48:09.599
they just did not give up. They kept playing.

00:48:10.079 --> 00:48:13.219
And I think if I had to, we talked about this

00:48:13.219 --> 00:48:16.260
during the match. I think Texas A &M played to

00:48:16.260 --> 00:48:19.460
win. They were aggressive. And it looked, specifically

00:48:19.460 --> 00:48:21.559
from the left sides for Kentucky, like they were

00:48:21.559 --> 00:48:25.019
playing tight. Not to lose. Not to lose. Big

00:48:25.019 --> 00:48:28.760
difference. But Texas A &M did that, I thought,

00:48:28.780 --> 00:48:31.699
they did that to Nebraska. They did that to Louisville.

00:48:31.840 --> 00:48:34.130
They did it to Kentucky. They did it to Pitt.

00:48:34.389 --> 00:48:37.710
You know, they were fearless this whole tournament.

00:48:38.210 --> 00:48:40.329
And it paid off. That's what it takes to win,

00:48:40.369 --> 00:48:43.489
though. You need to go out and take the match.

00:48:44.010 --> 00:48:47.349
You need to swing to score. Not to, like, not

00:48:47.349 --> 00:48:50.829
make mistakes. Not to, oh, hopefully this team

00:48:50.829 --> 00:48:53.250
will cool down and we'll be able to just, like,

00:48:53.289 --> 00:48:55.210
be comfortable. No, winning is uncomfortable.

00:48:56.170 --> 00:48:58.349
You need to get out of your comfort zone. And

00:48:58.349 --> 00:49:01.869
I think that Texas A &M came out and they decided

00:49:01.869 --> 00:49:04.079
they were going to. take it they were going to

00:49:04.079 --> 00:49:07.579
swing to score and Kentucky didn't and particularly

00:49:07.579 --> 00:49:11.400
the two left sides which I'm sorry how do you

00:49:11.400 --> 00:49:15.079
have such a dominant season the best left side

00:49:15.079 --> 00:49:17.480
duo in the country and you come out and you put

00:49:17.480 --> 00:49:20.480
that performance together what to me the difference

00:49:20.480 --> 00:49:23.920
between the semifinals and the finals is that

00:49:23.920 --> 00:49:28.760
in the semifinals Hudson hit over 400 and in

00:49:28.760 --> 00:49:32.710
the finals she hit 200. Like, Delay was not good

00:49:32.710 --> 00:49:35.949
all Final Four, offensively. Delay hit 0 -36

00:49:35.949 --> 00:49:38.670
in this match. But she didn't pass well either.

00:49:38.969 --> 00:49:41.309
No. And by the time the third set rolled around,

00:49:41.429 --> 00:49:43.030
Kentucky didn't believe they were going to win.

00:49:43.190 --> 00:49:45.550
Like, that first... You could see the desperation

00:49:45.550 --> 00:49:49.130
and the frustration on certain faces. Yes. I

00:49:49.130 --> 00:49:50.989
mean, the first couple points in the third set,

00:49:51.150 --> 00:49:54.469
I don't think Lizzie Carr didn't jump for a set

00:49:54.469 --> 00:49:56.849
that went over her head. Yes. Eva Hudson went

00:49:56.849 --> 00:49:58.510
to set a ball that she should have been hitting,

00:49:58.550 --> 00:50:02.059
and then it landed on the floor. Eva was visibly

00:50:02.059 --> 00:50:05.199
frustrated. But I think like what you said about

00:50:05.199 --> 00:50:07.579
Lizzie Carr, O 'Brien got pulled toward the 10

00:50:07.579 --> 00:50:11.539
foot line, set a 31 or a B set or however you

00:50:11.539 --> 00:50:13.659
want to call it. Lizzie Carr just didn't even

00:50:13.659 --> 00:50:18.980
approach and jump. That for me is, speaks volumes

00:50:18.980 --> 00:50:22.360
to the lack of focus, the lack of engagement.

00:50:22.420 --> 00:50:25.360
And then a service coming mid court, she sticks

00:50:25.360 --> 00:50:27.380
her arms out and tries to pass it. I'm like,

00:50:27.480 --> 00:50:32.480
okay, the, The wheels are gone. They're on a

00:50:32.480 --> 00:50:34.840
different planet at this point. Kentucky just

00:50:34.840 --> 00:50:37.500
didn't know what to do. And again, I thought

00:50:37.500 --> 00:50:40.280
O 'Brien set pretty much the same as she did

00:50:40.280 --> 00:50:42.219
in the semi. It wasn't consistent. It wasn't

00:50:42.219 --> 00:50:44.380
her best that we've seen from her all season.

00:50:44.420 --> 00:50:47.400
But it wasn't bad enough for this to be the outcome

00:50:47.400 --> 00:50:50.679
from the hitters. The difference to me was in

00:50:50.679 --> 00:50:53.159
the semifinal, I thought Hudson specifically

00:50:53.159 --> 00:50:55.699
was still swinging to score. She was still being

00:50:55.699 --> 00:50:58.059
aggressive on balls she was uncomfortable with

00:50:58.059 --> 00:51:01.309
in the... Finals, it didn't happen. And interestingly,

00:51:01.590 --> 00:51:05.050
the reason I think Kentucky went up so big in

00:51:05.050 --> 00:51:07.630
the beginning of the first set is they were not

00:51:07.630 --> 00:51:09.449
comfortable and they ended up rolling and tipping

00:51:09.449 --> 00:51:11.150
a whole bunch of balls into the middle of the

00:51:11.150 --> 00:51:14.250
court. Now, A &M planned for a perimeter defense

00:51:14.250 --> 00:51:16.449
because they're both big swingers. And so those

00:51:16.449 --> 00:51:19.650
tips and rolls scored early and often at the

00:51:19.650 --> 00:51:24.000
beginning of that set. A &M realized that they

00:51:24.000 --> 00:51:25.460
were going to keep doing that, whether because

00:51:25.460 --> 00:51:27.219
they couldn't hit it or that was all they had

00:51:27.219 --> 00:51:30.079
left to them. They made an adjustment, and Kentucky

00:51:30.079 --> 00:51:32.380
never started swinging to reset the defense,

00:51:32.460 --> 00:51:34.460
and they just got transition opportunity after

00:51:34.460 --> 00:51:36.820
transition opportunity. I'm definitely not laying

00:51:36.820 --> 00:51:39.000
this all at O 'Brien's feet because Kentucky

00:51:39.000 --> 00:51:41.800
didn't pass well either. When you have a young

00:51:41.800 --> 00:51:44.679
setter, you need to make life easy for them,

00:51:44.739 --> 00:51:47.179
and they didn't. It's not like A &M's serving

00:51:47.179 --> 00:51:50.119
strategy was out of this world. They were just...

00:51:50.519 --> 00:51:53.039
Serving the sideline of the passing left side.

00:51:53.139 --> 00:51:57.400
Yeah. Period. And they weren't executing. It

00:51:57.400 --> 00:52:01.659
was disappointing because I was expecting a knockdown

00:52:01.659 --> 00:52:05.820
drag out fight. I expected a great match. Every

00:52:05.820 --> 00:52:11.219
set overtime, big hits, wild digs, massive blocks,

00:52:11.619 --> 00:52:15.039
lead changes. I had huge expectations for this

00:52:15.039 --> 00:52:18.139
match. And like A &M has been building to that.

00:52:18.219 --> 00:52:21.960
We saw like in the regionals, they were up big

00:52:21.960 --> 00:52:24.519
in several sets, like kind of bleeding out on

00:52:24.519 --> 00:52:27.119
the court, giving up those leads. And so they

00:52:27.119 --> 00:52:29.820
going through that, those moments in the regional,

00:52:29.840 --> 00:52:33.280
they cleaned that up in the final four. We didn't

00:52:33.280 --> 00:52:36.780
see A &M go up huge in certain sets and just

00:52:36.780 --> 00:52:39.840
like completely blow it the way that we saw in

00:52:39.840 --> 00:52:43.210
the regional. And I think that speaks to the

00:52:43.210 --> 00:52:45.929
belief that they developed, the confidence they

00:52:45.929 --> 00:52:49.070
developed in winning those tight regionals matches.

00:52:49.570 --> 00:52:56.349
And we saw a much more calm, confident team that

00:52:56.349 --> 00:52:59.530
was executing at a very high level and just going

00:52:59.530 --> 00:53:02.369
for it. Whereas on Kentucky side, like Eva Hudson,

00:53:02.409 --> 00:53:05.230
you could see her arm as she's swinging. It was.

00:53:05.639 --> 00:53:08.139
hesitant it was a little tentative she wasn't

00:53:08.139 --> 00:53:11.699
putting a full swing together and I'm sorry in

00:53:11.699 --> 00:53:14.559
a moment like that you need to look at yourself

00:53:14.559 --> 00:53:17.019
and you need to be okay being like I am leaving

00:53:17.019 --> 00:53:20.099
nothing like how do I want to feel when this

00:53:20.099 --> 00:53:24.340
is over and the answer should be I want no regrets

00:53:24.340 --> 00:53:27.360
I am going for it if I go down I am going down

00:53:27.360 --> 00:53:30.599
swinging hard and giving it everything I've gotten

00:53:30.599 --> 00:53:35.440
I watching that there was hesitation Totally.

00:53:35.440 --> 00:53:40.239
And this is really interesting because A &M managed

00:53:40.239 --> 00:53:44.340
to isolate the best players on opposing teams.

00:53:44.380 --> 00:53:46.519
There were times, and we talked about this in

00:53:46.519 --> 00:53:49.820
other matches, Eva Hudson would get a kill and

00:53:49.820 --> 00:53:52.480
she was so in her own head, she would just walk

00:53:52.480 --> 00:53:54.900
back and not engage with her team. Again, we

00:53:54.900 --> 00:53:57.199
saw that happen in several other situations and

00:53:57.199 --> 00:54:00.500
A &M just does that to you. Their block is disciplined.

00:54:00.679 --> 00:54:03.409
Their defense is disciplined. They make it. Hard

00:54:03.409 --> 00:54:05.989
to score. You start thinking about, man, what

00:54:05.989 --> 00:54:08.170
do I have to do to be able to make that swing?

00:54:08.269 --> 00:54:10.369
And you get uncomfortable. You miss out the sideline.

00:54:10.409 --> 00:54:11.969
Well, then they finally get a ball back and then

00:54:11.969 --> 00:54:14.849
they miss the serve. Yeah. Like A &M put together

00:54:14.849 --> 00:54:18.349
a great performance and. They were able to apply

00:54:18.349 --> 00:54:21.150
pressure to their opponents consistently in a

00:54:21.150 --> 00:54:23.989
way I don't think many of those top teams had

00:54:23.989 --> 00:54:27.230
ever experienced. They didn't back down. They

00:54:27.230 --> 00:54:31.530
came to fight and they did. And I'm just like,

00:54:31.550 --> 00:54:35.239
they're. Ball control was good. The way that

00:54:35.239 --> 00:54:39.019
WAC was running that offense, it was fast, but

00:54:39.019 --> 00:54:42.260
incorporating the middles like we saw in the

00:54:42.260 --> 00:54:45.659
semifinal match against Pitt. It's just they

00:54:45.659 --> 00:54:50.579
were able to score and find ways and be aggressive

00:54:50.579 --> 00:54:54.440
because of the speed they were running. The ball

00:54:54.440 --> 00:54:56.519
control allowed them to run that with speed.

00:54:57.320 --> 00:55:00.000
Their block, the way that they're able to read

00:55:00.000 --> 00:55:02.820
the play and move laterally and just the discipline

00:55:02.820 --> 00:55:06.219
that they have in reading the situation. They

00:55:06.219 --> 00:55:10.619
got so many slowdowns. Just, yeah. And their

00:55:10.619 --> 00:55:14.539
service pressure. Just top to bottom, they did

00:55:14.539 --> 00:55:19.059
a great job. They were a championship caliber

00:55:19.059 --> 00:55:22.579
group. I don't think they have a standout. Storrs

00:55:22.579 --> 00:55:25.000
is good. Lednicki is good. Kosakpola is good.

00:55:25.119 --> 00:55:27.300
But you're not picking any of those players,

00:55:27.400 --> 00:55:30.320
probably even in the top five for their position.

00:55:31.039 --> 00:55:34.059
Well, and again, we see one A &M player got first

00:55:34.059 --> 00:55:39.139
team All -American. Two got second. Yeah. It

00:55:39.139 --> 00:55:44.199
was just a great team performance. Coaching staff

00:55:44.199 --> 00:55:47.400
wise, Jamie did a great job. Game plan. But even

00:55:47.400 --> 00:55:50.980
his pregame speeches are just like so on point.

00:55:51.719 --> 00:55:54.719
A team like that, they need to understand that

00:55:54.719 --> 00:55:57.960
you believe in them and that they belong there.

00:55:58.219 --> 00:56:00.480
Listening to what he was saying to them before

00:56:00.480 --> 00:56:03.539
the match, it's like they have created a team

00:56:03.539 --> 00:56:07.960
identity and a culture together that I just think

00:56:07.960 --> 00:56:11.900
set them apart. from the other teams that have

00:56:11.900 --> 00:56:14.000
the quote -unquote like blue blood athletes.

00:56:14.440 --> 00:56:16.099
Well, I thought it was really cool. I didn't

00:56:16.099 --> 00:56:17.480
know this ahead of time. Before those players

00:56:17.480 --> 00:56:19.960
played club together. And the assistant coach

00:56:19.960 --> 00:56:23.559
was the club coach. From 15U. Just like the story.

00:56:23.659 --> 00:56:27.480
And I am not like somebody who really. Sentimental.

00:56:27.480 --> 00:56:29.219
I'm not sentimental. I don't really care about

00:56:29.219 --> 00:56:32.909
that stuff. I'm just like, let's see. may the

00:56:32.909 --> 00:56:35.489
best man win. You know, like I don't really get

00:56:35.489 --> 00:56:37.989
wrapped up in the story. That aspect of them

00:56:37.989 --> 00:56:40.530
playing club together and then all of them going

00:56:40.530 --> 00:56:43.329
to A &M with the same coach and like just going

00:56:43.329 --> 00:56:46.050
through that. Like I still have really good relationships

00:56:46.050 --> 00:56:48.269
with girls that I played club with. If I had

00:56:48.269 --> 00:56:50.250
had the opportunity to play college with them

00:56:50.250 --> 00:56:53.389
too, like that is so special. But then in addition

00:56:53.389 --> 00:56:56.510
to that, like the story of Kausak Paula, like

00:56:56.510 --> 00:56:59.210
choosing a program where she could help make

00:56:59.210 --> 00:57:03.760
them good again. Yeah. Not every athlete, myself

00:57:03.760 --> 00:57:07.380
included, would make that same choice. Do you

00:57:07.380 --> 00:57:10.099
know what I mean? Stowers coming back. Stowers

00:57:10.099 --> 00:57:12.480
story. Are you kidding me? You're medically retired.

00:57:12.719 --> 00:57:14.760
You don't think you can ever play again. And

00:57:14.760 --> 00:57:18.480
then you come back. And you're MVP. Are you joking?

00:57:18.980 --> 00:57:23.039
Come on. That team made you want to cheer for

00:57:23.039 --> 00:57:26.300
them. And you guys, you know me. I do not cheer

00:57:26.300 --> 00:57:28.800
for the underdog. I'm not sentimental. I don't

00:57:28.800 --> 00:57:30.780
care about stuff like that. But this team just,

00:57:30.840 --> 00:57:34.000
like, got under my skin. And the Grinch, her

00:57:34.000 --> 00:57:38.019
heart is beating, okay? Merry Christmas. Yeah,

00:57:38.079 --> 00:57:40.059
I don't know. Again, there's not a lot of volleyball

00:57:40.059 --> 00:57:41.940
to talk about because it just wasn't. It was

00:57:41.940 --> 00:57:44.860
one -sided. Congrats to Texas A &M across the

00:57:44.860 --> 00:57:48.139
board, the staff. I think I cried. I got full

00:57:48.139 --> 00:57:50.599
body chills several times. I think I cried. Yes.

00:57:51.230 --> 00:57:53.170
I am going to watch How the Grinch Stole Christmas

00:57:53.170 --> 00:57:55.170
because I think that this is perfectly timed.

00:57:55.909 --> 00:57:57.989
Adam doesn't have anything to say. Sometimes

00:57:57.989 --> 00:57:59.829
I say things and he's just like, you're actually

00:57:59.829 --> 00:58:03.670
insane. Like, I'm dumbfounded. This seemed like

00:58:03.670 --> 00:58:06.030
the perfect wrap. Congrats to Texas A &M. That

00:58:06.030 --> 00:58:09.769
was an incredible run. It was so fun to watch.

00:58:10.030 --> 00:58:11.809
I wish the final would have been better, but,

00:58:11.809 --> 00:58:14.699
you know, it is what it is. All right, everybody,

00:58:14.800 --> 00:58:17.159
we are back with listener questions this week.

00:58:17.400 --> 00:58:20.280
It's hard to pick them, okay? We have so many

00:58:20.280 --> 00:58:24.579
questions. So let's start with this one. What

00:58:24.579 --> 00:58:27.280
do you guys think of Kirsten Simon from Wisconsin,

00:58:27.739 --> 00:58:29.699
the libero? I feel like when I watch Wisconsin,

00:58:29.860 --> 00:58:32.159
I rarely notice her, which Adam says is good,

00:58:32.260 --> 00:58:34.940
but I never see her do anything that stands out

00:58:34.940 --> 00:58:38.539
in a good way. A few times I do notice her if

00:58:38.539 --> 00:58:41.679
she's aced slash overpasses, though that does

00:58:41.679 --> 00:58:45.300
seem to be rare. I thought she was fine in their

00:58:45.300 --> 00:58:50.019
semifinal. She's not a standout in any way for

00:58:50.019 --> 00:58:52.860
me yet. I think it's impressive that you have

00:58:52.860 --> 00:58:56.579
a freshman taking up that role and passing. I

00:58:56.579 --> 00:58:58.860
also had a freshman last year in Lola Schumacher.

00:58:59.000 --> 00:59:01.420
Well, we won't talk about that. I think there's

00:59:01.420 --> 00:59:04.159
potential there. I think defensively, she looks

00:59:04.159 --> 00:59:07.309
like she's in. good position i think she moves

00:59:07.309 --> 00:59:10.750
well i think she passes pretty well i don't have

00:59:10.750 --> 00:59:12.989
a strong opinion which means she did her job

00:59:12.989 --> 00:59:15.750
quite frankly she's not a black hole like i don't

00:59:15.750 --> 00:59:18.849
watch her and like pinpoint things that i'm like

00:59:18.849 --> 00:59:21.690
wow massive red flag Yeah. And there weren't

00:59:21.690 --> 00:59:23.329
places like you were totally out of position

00:59:23.329 --> 00:59:26.210
or you should have dug that ball and didn't.

00:59:26.210 --> 00:59:27.909
I think there were a couple that went over the

00:59:27.909 --> 00:59:29.489
net that I was like, yeah, you probably should

00:59:29.489 --> 00:59:31.829
have had that one. I think she's fine. She's

00:59:31.829 --> 00:59:34.650
not like on all American level libero for me,

00:59:34.670 --> 00:59:38.030
but she's not costing Wisconsin games. Let's

00:59:38.030 --> 00:59:39.730
put it that way. I don't think as a freshman,

00:59:39.869 --> 00:59:42.809
you could ask for anything more. Like she did

00:59:42.809 --> 00:59:44.650
a great job. There's a good foundation there.

00:59:44.730 --> 00:59:47.489
And I think she has the potential to be, you

00:59:47.489 --> 00:59:50.309
know, very good in two years if she keeps. Getting

00:59:50.309 --> 00:59:52.789
better. No red flags. Which is a win over here,

00:59:52.869 --> 00:59:55.809
okay, you guys? Okay, question two. Can you guys

00:59:55.809 --> 00:59:58.210
do a quick comparison of some of the major setters

00:59:58.210 --> 01:00:00.769
in the NCAA? I'd like to understand why Swindle

01:00:00.769 --> 01:00:03.789
is so bad and why Izzy Stark is considered to

01:00:03.789 --> 01:00:07.269
be the best or one of the best. You guys seem

01:00:07.269 --> 01:00:09.409
kind of up and down about Bergen. I'd like to

01:00:09.409 --> 01:00:12.590
hear your thoughts. Okay, the setting position,

01:00:12.829 --> 01:00:16.610
I think, is one that is a very difficult position

01:00:16.610 --> 01:00:21.579
to quantify with stats. We hear all about hitter

01:00:21.579 --> 01:00:24.599
efficiency and team hitting percentage and all

01:00:24.599 --> 01:00:27.340
of those kind of things. I don't really think

01:00:27.340 --> 01:00:31.059
those matter for setters. They matter, but they're

01:00:31.059 --> 01:00:35.119
far less indicative of success than like a hitting

01:00:35.119 --> 01:00:38.099
percentage for a hitter, in my opinion. Yeah,

01:00:38.139 --> 01:00:41.400
I feel like when I am evaluating setters, it's

01:00:41.400 --> 01:00:44.679
a lot of like, not necessarily intangible things,

01:00:44.800 --> 01:00:46.539
but just things that I observe in the moment,

01:00:46.619 --> 01:00:50.239
like that you said. stats don't really pick up

01:00:50.239 --> 01:00:54.800
it's like how are you moving to the ball how

01:00:54.800 --> 01:00:58.179
good are you at like winning those or making

01:00:58.179 --> 01:01:00.739
good sets on like those tight passes or those

01:01:00.739 --> 01:01:03.420
tight plays when what is your decision making

01:01:03.420 --> 01:01:06.559
like on when to dump and like where to put the

01:01:06.559 --> 01:01:09.460
ball how do you deliver the ball out of system

01:01:09.460 --> 01:01:12.559
what's your tempo like your consistency so there's

01:01:12.559 --> 01:01:15.019
like so many pieces that I am personally looking

01:01:15.019 --> 01:01:19.349
at And so I think a reason why Swindle catches

01:01:19.349 --> 01:01:23.389
so many strays from me is that her footwork,

01:01:23.469 --> 01:01:26.690
she rarely squares up when she has to move, which

01:01:26.690 --> 01:01:29.929
completely takes hitters out of her vision. And

01:01:29.929 --> 01:01:32.710
so she's just going on feel. So her set location

01:01:32.710 --> 01:01:36.590
is pretty inconsistent. And she barely runs the

01:01:36.590 --> 01:01:38.389
middle because she's not putting herself in a

01:01:38.389 --> 01:01:41.530
position to see the middle. Those are my issues

01:01:41.530 --> 01:01:44.769
with her. What do I think makes Izzy Stark so

01:01:44.769 --> 01:01:48.059
good? She can deliver the ball with precision

01:01:48.059 --> 01:01:50.480
and consistency from anywhere on the court. Her

01:01:50.480 --> 01:01:53.760
decision making and aggression when she's going

01:01:53.760 --> 01:01:57.360
on to. I think is really good. She puts up a

01:01:57.360 --> 01:02:00.539
good block. She runs a balanced offense, knows

01:02:00.539 --> 01:02:03.320
who to set when, and it's like her hitters always

01:02:03.320 --> 01:02:06.199
look in rhythm. Why I put Bergen in the middle

01:02:06.199 --> 01:02:08.780
of that is like her out -of -system setting is

01:02:08.780 --> 01:02:12.420
very inconsistent. The tempos change, the location

01:02:12.420 --> 01:02:15.960
changes. I think she runs a very good offense

01:02:15.960 --> 01:02:19.320
in system, but like... It's things like that

01:02:19.320 --> 01:02:22.480
that I kind of look at. I agree 100 % with all

01:02:22.480 --> 01:02:24.000
of the things you said. I think a couple of the

01:02:24.000 --> 01:02:26.559
things I look at is do they look the same when

01:02:26.559 --> 01:02:28.360
they're setting all positions? So how much are

01:02:28.360 --> 01:02:30.619
you giving away where you're going? Do you have

01:02:30.619 --> 01:02:32.539
tendencies? Are you square to the same spot?

01:02:32.639 --> 01:02:35.199
Do you take the ball in the same spot above your

01:02:35.199 --> 01:02:37.280
head regardless of who you're setting? Another

01:02:37.280 --> 01:02:39.619
big thing for me is do you own the middle of

01:02:39.619 --> 01:02:42.300
the court? Do you find a way to hold the middle

01:02:42.300 --> 01:02:44.139
blocker, whether it's with your middle blocker

01:02:44.139 --> 01:02:46.639
or whether it's a pipe ball or whether it's with

01:02:46.639 --> 01:02:49.389
a dump? All of those things, owning the middle

01:02:49.389 --> 01:02:51.690
of the court is so important. And it's that setting

01:02:51.690 --> 01:02:54.590
feel of knowing when that middle's cheating on

01:02:54.590 --> 01:02:56.530
you, when you have to get to hold them, who's

01:02:56.530 --> 01:02:59.670
open, who's hot. And I was actually, we had some

01:02:59.670 --> 01:03:01.349
questions about, hey, can you find some video

01:03:01.349 --> 01:03:03.730
about people, you know, setting balls that you're

01:03:03.730 --> 01:03:06.210
talking about? And if you want, go back and watch

01:03:06.210 --> 01:03:09.949
Wisconsin play in the semifinal. And there were

01:03:09.949 --> 01:03:12.110
a bunch of out -of -system balls in the fourth

01:03:12.110 --> 01:03:14.409
and fifth set, I believe, that Furbringer set.

01:03:14.880 --> 01:03:17.920
in system to Mimi Collier. That's exactly what

01:03:17.920 --> 01:03:20.320
I'm talking about. She gets there, she gets square,

01:03:20.579 --> 01:03:22.980
she delivers an out -of -system ball, but there's

01:03:22.980 --> 01:03:25.280
tempo for Mimi, and it's in the same location.

01:03:25.719 --> 01:03:28.239
I think Furbringer has improved a lot. I would

01:03:28.239 --> 01:03:31.539
put her and Izzy Stark definitely up there. Not

01:03:31.539 --> 01:03:33.820
every setter completely turns their head to look

01:03:33.820 --> 01:03:35.780
across the net to try to isolate their hitters,

01:03:35.800 --> 01:03:39.590
but she has... and is starting to do that to

01:03:39.590 --> 01:03:41.530
get her hitters one -on -one. Like there's just,

01:03:41.650 --> 01:03:44.269
yeah, she is very good. I think Stucky before

01:03:44.269 --> 01:03:46.829
she got injured would have been on that list

01:03:46.829 --> 01:03:48.550
for me. Yeah, she's not moving as well anymore

01:03:48.550 --> 01:03:51.969
for obvious reasons, but. I think Maddie Wack

01:03:51.969 --> 01:03:55.650
did an outstanding job in this run in terms of

01:03:55.650 --> 01:03:58.269
getting her middles involved, in terms of running

01:03:58.269 --> 01:04:00.630
tempo and making decisions and isolating hitters.

01:04:00.670 --> 01:04:03.610
Like she clearly. I like Cabello too. She does

01:04:03.610 --> 01:04:05.690
a good job. She's very good offensively. Sometimes

01:04:05.690 --> 01:04:08.289
her location is a little inconsistent, which

01:04:08.289 --> 01:04:12.389
I think doesn't put her at the stark level. Parks

01:04:12.389 --> 01:04:15.789
at Stanford I think is going to be very good.

01:04:15.969 --> 01:04:21.210
Like a step down. O 'Brien made strides. O 'Brien

01:04:21.210 --> 01:04:23.349
doesn't strike me as being a natural setter.

01:04:23.429 --> 01:04:24.650
Like there's some people you watch and you're

01:04:24.650 --> 01:04:26.269
like, yes, you're a setter. Well, I think she

01:04:26.269 --> 01:04:28.210
was a hitter too, so that makes sense. That doesn't

01:04:28.210 --> 01:04:31.230
shock me, but she's coming along. I think there's

01:04:31.230 --> 01:04:33.510
potential there. Those would be the ones that

01:04:33.510 --> 01:04:36.710
kind of come to mind. Okay, question three. How

01:04:36.710 --> 01:04:40.250
difficult is it to change positions mainly within

01:04:40.250 --> 01:04:42.949
hitters? For example, could a good offensive

01:04:42.949 --> 01:04:45.730
middle succeed as an opposite? Would a good pin

01:04:45.730 --> 01:04:48.090
hitter be likely to find success at the other

01:04:48.090 --> 01:04:51.550
pin or as a middle? Or are the roles too distinct

01:04:51.550 --> 01:04:53.670
and specialized at that level to allow players

01:04:53.670 --> 01:04:56.030
to swap? I think if you're a pin going to the

01:04:56.030 --> 01:04:58.170
middle, not going to happen. Blocking -wise,

01:04:58.230 --> 01:05:00.840
you'd be... spinning like a top. I think the

01:05:00.840 --> 01:05:03.900
most logical transition is middle to opposite

01:05:03.900 --> 01:05:09.119
because opposites don't pass or anything. I mean,

01:05:09.139 --> 01:05:11.159
I went from a middle to an opposite to a left

01:05:11.159 --> 01:05:13.340
side, so it's possible. I won't say I was great

01:05:13.340 --> 01:05:16.019
at any of them, but I did play all of those positions

01:05:16.019 --> 01:05:18.699
at a college level. I guess not middle. I was

01:05:18.699 --> 01:05:20.840
middle in club. There's just different things

01:05:20.840 --> 01:05:23.059
to do. If your fundamentals are good. You know,

01:05:23.059 --> 01:05:24.719
if your eye work is good from blocking, you can

01:05:24.719 --> 01:05:26.460
switch positions. If you have good feet to ball,

01:05:26.579 --> 01:05:28.420
you can hit on either pin. You know, there are

01:05:28.420 --> 01:05:31.079
some nuances that you can pick up. Passing is

01:05:31.079 --> 01:05:33.019
the biggest one. Like, can you learn how to pass?

01:05:33.199 --> 01:05:34.900
And then, you know, moving to the middle, it

01:05:34.900 --> 01:05:37.739
just doesn't happen because the outside blockers

01:05:37.739 --> 01:05:40.420
don't move laterally as well as the middles generally.

01:05:40.539 --> 01:05:42.840
That takes a lot of practice and a lot of discipline.

01:05:42.880 --> 01:05:45.420
But if we're talking straight offense, I think

01:05:45.420 --> 01:05:47.760
given enough time to work on the timing and stuff,

01:05:47.900 --> 01:05:52.119
like, it can happen. And we see at the high level,

01:05:52.750 --> 01:05:55.650
oftentimes like in not oftentimes but in college

01:05:55.650 --> 01:05:57.949
we are like we've heard oh she played middle

01:05:57.949 --> 01:06:00.329
last year now she's playing outside or she's

01:06:00.329 --> 01:06:01.949
going wherever her team needs her like if we're

01:06:01.949 --> 01:06:04.690
looking straight offense it is possible totally

01:06:04.690 --> 01:06:08.769
when you add in those other skills not so much

01:06:08.769 --> 01:06:10.650
and some people generally have good body control

01:06:10.650 --> 01:06:12.969
and good like hand -eye coordination you can

01:06:12.969 --> 01:06:14.909
learn how to pass doesn't work for everybody

01:06:14.909 --> 01:06:19.920
but question is a four four So this question

01:06:19.920 --> 01:06:24.199
pertains to video challenges. And when a coach

01:06:24.199 --> 01:06:28.840
calls a challenge, the down official cannot come

01:06:28.840 --> 01:06:33.900
up with conclusive evidence for or against. And

01:06:33.900 --> 01:06:36.380
then the coach loses their challenge. So the

01:06:36.380 --> 01:06:39.179
question is, if the video quality is poor and

01:06:39.179 --> 01:06:42.619
the ref is not able to answer the yes or no question.

01:06:43.480 --> 01:06:45.420
Do you feel the coach should get their challenge

01:06:45.420 --> 01:06:48.260
back? I said this to Sarah right when it happened.

01:06:48.659 --> 01:06:51.599
If you're telling me you can't get the answer

01:06:51.599 --> 01:06:54.239
to what I'm challenging, I should 100 % get my

01:06:54.239 --> 01:06:56.420
challenge back. I think that's absolutely ridiculous.

01:06:57.000 --> 01:06:58.960
I kind of feel the same way. Yeah. Like I made

01:06:58.960 --> 01:07:01.039
the challenge and you can't figure it out and

01:07:01.039 --> 01:07:05.019
I'm being penalized for it. That's brutal. Brutal.

01:07:05.039 --> 01:07:08.679
Yeah. Well, okay. So here's another piece that

01:07:08.679 --> 01:07:11.929
we kind of discussed. How do you feel? We saw

01:07:11.929 --> 01:07:13.949
this in the Pitt -Texas A &M game. Dan Fisher

01:07:13.949 --> 01:07:17.230
challenged that there was a touch. In actuality,

01:07:17.230 --> 01:07:20.530
the ball landed in. So in the course of evaluating

01:07:20.530 --> 01:07:23.750
the play, the ref looked at the touch and if

01:07:23.750 --> 01:07:26.510
the ball landed in. And I was like, well, to

01:07:26.510 --> 01:07:28.409
maintain the integrity of the sport, like, yeah,

01:07:28.429 --> 01:07:30.329
Pitt should get that point. The ball was in.

01:07:30.449 --> 01:07:32.269
And you were like, she should not have looked

01:07:32.269 --> 01:07:34.630
if the ball was in. He challenged the wrong thing.

01:07:34.710 --> 01:07:37.369
He should lose his challenge anyway. And fine,

01:07:37.590 --> 01:07:41.420
Pitt can get the point. Okay. I didn't say that

01:07:41.420 --> 01:07:43.719
they shouldn't look at the outer end. I think

01:07:43.719 --> 01:07:45.460
you want to get the call right. I agree with

01:07:45.460 --> 01:07:47.840
you on that 100%. So you thought that they should

01:07:47.840 --> 01:07:49.320
have just gotten the point, but then he should

01:07:49.320 --> 01:07:51.119
have lost his challenge because he challenged

01:07:51.119 --> 01:07:52.699
the wrong thing. Yeah, if you challenge the wrong

01:07:52.699 --> 01:07:54.800
thing, that means you're throwing darts at the

01:07:54.800 --> 01:07:57.260
dartboard. You're hoping that something happened.

01:07:57.460 --> 01:07:59.900
A challenge is one thing, but check all five

01:07:59.900 --> 01:08:03.420
options just to be safe. I'm 100 % advocate for

01:08:03.420 --> 01:08:06.239
making the right call. If you challenge the wrong

01:08:06.239 --> 01:08:08.920
thing and your challenge is wrong, in my opinion,

01:08:08.960 --> 01:08:11.219
you should lose your challenge. You can gain

01:08:11.219 --> 01:08:13.679
the point. That's fine. But technically, your

01:08:13.679 --> 01:08:16.180
challenge was incorrect. You just got lucky.

01:08:16.840 --> 01:08:18.760
That's how I would. Okay, let us know what you

01:08:18.760 --> 01:08:22.430
guys think about this. But the one. Or if it's

01:08:22.430 --> 01:08:24.069
inconclusive and they can't find evidence, I

01:08:24.069 --> 01:08:25.510
do think they should get their challenge back.

01:08:25.510 --> 01:08:27.430
Totally agree with that. Okay, question five.

01:08:27.689 --> 01:08:30.630
I'm wondering if you think that Texas A &M has

01:08:30.630 --> 01:08:33.689
the money or program appeal to bring in Izzy

01:08:33.689 --> 01:08:38.529
Stark or another big name player from the transfer

01:08:38.529 --> 01:08:41.270
portal. Seems like all the players love the program,

01:08:41.489 --> 01:08:44.369
but since they aren't a traditional blue -blooded

01:08:44.369 --> 01:08:47.189
program, I wasn't sure if they'd be able to replace

01:08:47.189 --> 01:08:49.460
all their graduating talent. they might have

01:08:49.460 --> 01:08:51.180
some appeal. No, I'm just, they are graduating

01:08:51.180 --> 01:08:53.539
a ton of people, which makes me question the

01:08:53.539 --> 01:08:55.819
future a little bit, but I can't speak to how

01:08:55.819 --> 01:08:59.420
much money they have. I found out. I've got a

01:08:59.420 --> 01:09:03.119
big football program. Like I feel like this athletic

01:09:03.119 --> 01:09:07.359
department for sure has money. Yes. Whether they

01:09:07.359 --> 01:09:10.439
get to spend it on volleyball, who knows? I think

01:09:10.439 --> 01:09:14.920
that Jamie has, he developed those players and

01:09:14.920 --> 01:09:17.479
he made them better. And I think for a lot of

01:09:17.479 --> 01:09:21.100
players, That probably holds some weight. If

01:09:21.100 --> 01:09:23.260
you want to play internationally, the fact that

01:09:23.260 --> 01:09:26.239
he's done that, I think draws you to him and

01:09:26.239 --> 01:09:29.279
that program. I think the girls genuinely liked

01:09:29.279 --> 01:09:30.859
playing for him. That's the impression that I

01:09:30.859 --> 01:09:33.699
got. So that's also a positive. I'm hoping he

01:09:33.699 --> 01:09:36.859
doesn't go massive dumpster diving in the portal

01:09:36.859 --> 01:09:39.800
because I just, I like the development that he'd

01:09:39.800 --> 01:09:42.159
done. I hope that the young kids that he has,

01:09:42.220 --> 01:09:44.380
he's developed and they're stepping into play.

01:09:44.579 --> 01:09:46.939
I think it would be cool if that was kind of

01:09:46.939 --> 01:09:50.579
his MO. So you don't want him to go into the

01:09:50.579 --> 01:09:53.399
portal? I don't. You guys know how I feel about

01:09:53.399 --> 01:09:54.699
the portal, period. I don't like when people

01:09:54.699 --> 01:09:58.720
do it. But to answer the question, I feel like

01:09:58.720 --> 01:10:02.399
it will take one big -name player to kind of

01:10:02.399 --> 01:10:06.140
do it, and then others would probably be more

01:10:06.140 --> 01:10:08.399
likely to follow. And I don't know. I haven't

01:10:08.399 --> 01:10:10.279
seen the players. Right off the bat, I'm skeptical

01:10:10.279 --> 01:10:13.579
because they are losing so many players, so many

01:10:13.579 --> 01:10:15.600
of the people who actually were on the floor.

01:10:15.739 --> 01:10:18.390
They still have Stowers, though. And she was

01:10:18.390 --> 01:10:19.890
very good. Who's going to give the ball to Stowers?

01:10:20.090 --> 01:10:23.630
You don't know what kind of young players you

01:10:23.630 --> 01:10:26.130
had. He took those kids for four years and built

01:10:26.130 --> 01:10:27.649
them into winners. Are they going to win next

01:10:27.649 --> 01:10:30.310
year? Probably not. But does he have faith in

01:10:30.310 --> 01:10:32.109
his development of the athletes that he has?

01:10:32.189 --> 01:10:35.069
We'll find out. I do think it will be a desirable

01:10:35.069 --> 01:10:38.729
place to go for a certain type of bullshit. Do

01:10:38.729 --> 01:10:40.970
you think Izzy Stark would consider going there?

01:10:41.149 --> 01:10:43.350
No, I don't think there's enough pieces. There

01:10:43.350 --> 01:10:47.479
we go. All right. How much do you blame the Nebraska

01:10:47.479 --> 01:10:50.520
coaching staff for the loss against Texas A &M?

01:10:51.300 --> 01:10:54.020
All right. Well, I'm going to get, do you want

01:10:54.020 --> 01:10:55.840
to go first or you want me to go first? Go for

01:10:55.840 --> 01:10:57.960
it. My answer is probably not going to be popular,

01:10:58.039 --> 01:11:00.420
but. Adam never has an unpopular answer. And

01:11:00.420 --> 01:11:02.539
even if Adam gives an unpopular answer, it somehow

01:11:02.539 --> 01:11:06.720
happens to land on my shoulders. I don't put

01:11:06.720 --> 01:11:09.319
a ton of weight on the coaching staff's loss

01:11:09.319 --> 01:11:12.569
on this one. And here's why. Maybe you could

01:11:12.569 --> 01:11:14.949
have gotten Jackson going a little bit more.

01:11:15.010 --> 01:11:17.289
Maybe you could have run her in front of the

01:11:17.289 --> 01:11:19.649
setter, trying to find a way to get her going.

01:11:19.789 --> 01:11:22.710
That was one thing. But they didn't lose that

01:11:22.710 --> 01:11:26.489
match because of X's and O's, I don't think.

01:11:26.649 --> 01:11:28.989
The question is, what else could they have done?

01:11:29.189 --> 01:11:32.350
And I think about, you know, at the end of the

01:11:32.350 --> 01:11:35.170
day, you had a bunch of players on Nebraska who,

01:11:35.229 --> 01:11:39.029
in my opinion, were not able to handle the moment.

01:11:40.109 --> 01:11:42.430
put a product on the floor that they are accustomed

01:11:42.430 --> 01:11:45.409
to putting on the floor all year. I think for

01:11:45.409 --> 01:11:48.289
Danny and company, it's a really tough situation

01:11:48.289 --> 01:11:51.090
because you're coming in. It's your first year

01:11:51.090 --> 01:11:53.689
with the program. None of these are your athletes.

01:11:54.369 --> 01:11:56.970
And I think it's really hard to change culture

01:11:56.970 --> 01:11:58.890
when you're winning. Like, what are you supposed

01:11:58.890 --> 01:12:01.010
to do? Look at players and go, hey, that's not

01:12:01.010 --> 01:12:04.369
good enough. We've won 37 sets in a row. I think

01:12:04.369 --> 01:12:08.859
that's very challenging. For me, if I look at

01:12:08.859 --> 01:12:11.640
the identity of her Louisville programs, they

01:12:11.640 --> 01:12:16.000
were scrappy. They were fighters. They were gritty.

01:12:16.060 --> 01:12:18.380
I wouldn't use any of those words to describe

01:12:18.380 --> 01:12:21.460
the Nebraska program. I think Dani will bring

01:12:21.460 --> 01:12:25.600
Nebraska a little more into that realm because

01:12:25.600 --> 01:12:27.779
I think that's who she is, but she hasn't had

01:12:27.779 --> 01:12:31.420
a chance to do it. I think after this loss, now

01:12:31.420 --> 01:12:34.619
she has the authority to start molding the program

01:12:34.619 --> 01:12:38.199
in her own image. That's my take. Could you walk

01:12:38.199 --> 01:12:40.899
through your guys' overall thoughts on Emma Halter

01:12:40.899 --> 01:12:44.220
and compare her to some of the other libs? Some

01:12:44.220 --> 01:12:46.220
friends and I think she's underrated. Her out

01:12:46.220 --> 01:12:48.060
-of -system sets seem to be some of the best

01:12:48.060 --> 01:12:52.600
in the country. What do you think about her hands?

01:12:52.680 --> 01:12:55.039
What holds her back from getting All -American

01:12:55.039 --> 01:12:58.699
awards? Well, the reason she doesn't get any

01:12:58.699 --> 01:13:01.380
awards is because she's in a blue libero. And

01:13:01.380 --> 01:13:04.119
the liberos never get awards. Libero of the year?

01:13:04.539 --> 01:13:06.840
Oh. I thought we were talking All -Americans.

01:13:07.119 --> 01:13:09.239
No, like Lexi Rodriguez was an All -American

01:13:09.239 --> 01:13:11.979
four times in a row. I know. Like we already,

01:13:12.119 --> 01:13:14.199
who were the Liberos? We went over. It was like

01:13:14.199 --> 01:13:18.539
Tuzzo, Sands, and the Van Gorp. I think, again,

01:13:18.659 --> 01:13:22.739
I think Emma Halter is fine. I think that she

01:13:22.739 --> 01:13:24.859
passes pretty well. I will agree. Her hands are

01:13:24.859 --> 01:13:26.619
good. She sets better than Swindle. Best setter

01:13:26.619 --> 01:13:29.699
on Texas's team, for sure. Now we're just being

01:13:29.699 --> 01:13:34.560
mean. No, but I'm being serious. I think her

01:13:34.560 --> 01:13:37.340
hands are better than a lot of liberos. She's

01:13:37.340 --> 01:13:41.779
in the NCAA. Her setting is good. I would say

01:13:41.779 --> 01:13:44.319
yes. She's an elite level setter compared to

01:13:44.319 --> 01:13:49.640
her peers. Reads and plays outside of balls that

01:13:49.640 --> 01:13:52.760
she's quote unquote expected to dig. So I would

01:13:52.760 --> 01:13:54.779
say that's probably one area where she needs

01:13:54.779 --> 01:13:57.539
to get better. Liberos who want awards need to

01:13:57.539 --> 01:14:00.039
be spectacular defensively. That's what gets

01:14:00.039 --> 01:14:04.260
you noticed, I would say. passing wise, I think

01:14:04.260 --> 01:14:07.039
she's fine. I would want to see her take a little

01:14:07.039 --> 01:14:10.000
more court, like alleviate some of the pressure

01:14:10.000 --> 01:14:12.039
on your outside hitters. I think if she could

01:14:12.039 --> 01:14:15.439
do those two things, she would become very, very

01:14:15.439 --> 01:14:18.500
good. All right. You've talked about Babcock

01:14:18.500 --> 01:14:21.560
in LA 2028, but does a Fennec Cossack Paula have

01:14:21.560 --> 01:14:23.859
a chance? She's looked incredible this tournament,

01:14:23.859 --> 01:14:25.680
and I'd love to hear your thoughts on her chances

01:14:25.680 --> 01:14:28.340
for a successful international career. There

01:14:28.340 --> 01:14:31.340
is a large part of me that just wants to say

01:14:31.340 --> 01:14:34.319
yes because I was so impressed with how she played.

01:14:34.319 --> 01:14:37.699
She is an outstanding blocker. And I've said

01:14:37.699 --> 01:14:40.100
this like last week watching. I was saying it

01:14:40.100 --> 01:14:43.899
this week probably 17 times. She's 6 '2". If

01:14:43.899 --> 01:14:47.340
she was four inches taller, I would sit here

01:14:47.340 --> 01:14:51.319
and tell you she's a lock. I'm not of the middles

01:14:51.319 --> 01:14:57.109
that I've seen this season. grew to have so much

01:14:57.109 --> 01:14:59.609
respect for her watching the last few weeks.

01:14:59.909 --> 01:15:03.170
I, and even though Andy Jackson did not have

01:15:03.170 --> 01:15:05.750
a good last match, like Andy Jackson and a fan

01:15:05.750 --> 01:15:08.949
of classic Paula are my favorite NCAA middles

01:15:08.949 --> 01:15:11.789
right now. Like those two are the ones that have

01:15:11.789 --> 01:15:15.210
the most potential. It's just with the size difference

01:15:15.210 --> 01:15:17.789
for her, you're just in the air a little bit

01:15:17.789 --> 01:15:19.750
longer. If you have to bite on a middle and get

01:15:19.750 --> 01:15:22.130
outside and the sets are a little bit faster

01:15:22.130 --> 01:15:24.270
and you're just a little bit slower. Cause you,

01:15:24.569 --> 01:15:27.189
You have to get up to do those things. Now, I'm

01:15:27.189 --> 01:15:30.609
not saying you can't overcome those things. She

01:15:30.609 --> 01:15:33.510
would have to be incredibly disciplined, incredibly

01:15:33.510 --> 01:15:36.010
fast. And the thing he's talking about is like

01:15:36.010 --> 01:15:38.430
the time it takes for your hands to cross the

01:15:38.430 --> 01:15:40.250
plane of the net. We're not saying she can't

01:15:40.250 --> 01:15:44.189
jump. She jumps very well. But like a 6 '6 girl

01:15:44.189 --> 01:15:47.149
with her hands up, it's like a toe raise to get

01:15:47.149 --> 01:15:48.729
the hands over the net. You know what I mean?

01:15:48.729 --> 01:15:51.289
As opposed to a 6 '2 girl, it's that distance.

01:15:52.000 --> 01:15:54.340
that extra distance that needs to be covered.

01:15:54.560 --> 01:15:56.920
Think about if you have to soft block a middle,

01:15:57.020 --> 01:15:59.840
the 6 '6 girl can kind of reach and hop and then

01:15:59.840 --> 01:16:02.220
still get outside. She has to leave the ground

01:16:02.220 --> 01:16:04.439
to do that and then move over. And those seconds

01:16:04.439 --> 01:16:07.220
are precious in terms of closing a block. I think

01:16:07.220 --> 01:16:10.420
she'll get a look for sure at that size internationally.

01:16:10.840 --> 01:16:13.479
It's just really tough. Okay, our last question

01:16:13.479 --> 01:16:16.000
of the day. Do you think Stowers has international

01:16:16.000 --> 01:16:18.260
potential assuming her health won't hinder her?

01:16:18.750 --> 01:16:21.270
That girl was going for it in system, out of

01:16:21.270 --> 01:16:25.810
system. Her passing was decent. Will she have

01:16:25.810 --> 01:16:28.350
a setter who's able to run fast enough to kind

01:16:28.350 --> 01:16:33.170
of put her in a good position? Probably. She

01:16:33.170 --> 01:16:36.810
was hitting. She was going for it against. I

01:16:36.810 --> 01:16:40.010
loved her mentality. The mentality of an international

01:16:40.010 --> 01:16:43.489
player is there. I think her passing will need

01:16:43.489 --> 01:16:46.050
to be better. I'm not sure she can be your P1.

01:16:46.619 --> 01:16:50.539
Oh yeah. So that means you've got to be incredibly

01:16:50.539 --> 01:16:54.520
good defensively, a very sound passer. And if

01:16:54.520 --> 01:16:57.319
she can do those two things with that mentality

01:16:57.319 --> 01:17:01.819
as a hitter, I think, yes, let's not get crazy

01:17:01.819 --> 01:17:04.039
here, but like a Jordan Larson, like if you can

01:17:04.039 --> 01:17:06.699
be good in the back row, your ball control is

01:17:06.699 --> 01:17:09.560
good, but you can find ways to chip in, you know,

01:17:09.560 --> 01:17:12.020
eight to 10 points offensively in an international

01:17:12.020 --> 01:17:14.880
match. I think that's the role that she could

01:17:14.880 --> 01:17:18.229
be in. but she's got some ball control work to

01:17:18.229 --> 01:17:20.949
do. She jumps really well, though. 100%. We ran

01:17:20.949 --> 01:17:22.989
through a bunch of questions today. I just wanted

01:17:22.989 --> 01:17:25.869
to knock some NCAA ones out now that the season's

01:17:25.869 --> 01:17:28.289
over. We're not going to stop answering NCAA

01:17:28.289 --> 01:17:32.590
questions, but we definitely enjoyed seeing what

01:17:32.590 --> 01:17:34.689
you guys had to ask this week. All right, so

01:17:34.689 --> 01:17:38.689
looking forward to this week, you should be enjoying

01:17:38.689 --> 01:17:40.930
Christmas and the holidays if you celebrate,

01:17:41.130 --> 01:17:44.229
sipping on some eggnog, and we will be taking

01:17:44.229 --> 01:17:46.819
the week off, so there's nothing to watch. There's

01:17:46.819 --> 01:17:49.939
European club and other things if you have FIVB

01:17:49.939 --> 01:17:52.640
TV, but yeah, we will be taking the week off.

01:17:52.659 --> 01:17:55.079
So we'll see you the following week. After that,

01:17:55.220 --> 01:17:59.119
we will be looking at MLV. We've got some exciting

01:17:59.119 --> 01:18:01.939
things we think to share with you there. So that's

01:18:01.939 --> 01:18:04.720
a little bit of a teaser. We're also going to

01:18:04.720 --> 01:18:07.319
get into the transfer portal. We'll kind of look

01:18:07.319 --> 01:18:10.439
at. Some teams, winners, losers of that. There's

01:18:10.439 --> 01:18:12.560
a lot happening. Yeah, moving into next week

01:18:12.560 --> 01:18:15.140
or the next episode. So we'll let that simmer

01:18:15.140 --> 01:18:17.840
for a little bit so we can bring you some comprehensive

01:18:17.840 --> 01:18:21.819
updates in that regard. But enjoy the week and

01:18:21.819 --> 01:18:24.720
we'll see you in January. That concludes this

01:18:24.720 --> 01:18:26.659
week's episode of Volley Talk. There's always

01:18:26.659 --> 01:18:28.420
something shaking in the volleyball world, and

01:18:28.420 --> 01:18:30.880
we hope you enjoyed this little fix. Be sure

01:18:30.880 --> 01:18:32.859
to follow the show so you don't miss any updates,

01:18:33.000 --> 01:18:34.939
and we'd be so grateful if you would leave us

01:18:34.939 --> 01:18:37.699
a five -star review. You can also find us on

01:18:37.699 --> 01:18:41.359
Instagram at volleytalk underscore podcast. If

01:18:41.359 --> 01:18:43.800
you have a topic you'd like us to discuss, reach

01:18:43.800 --> 01:18:46.979
out to us on Instagram or at info at sarahpavin

01:18:46.979 --> 01:18:49.970
.com. Thanks so much for joining us. We'll see

01:18:49.970 --> 01:18:52.329
you in a couple weeks. Happy holidays, everybody.

01:18:52.789 --> 01:18:53.810
And Happy New Year.