Sloppy play and a lot of unforced errors.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Wisconsin Badgers 2020-2021
- Thread starter Timothy A
- Start date
Sloppy play and a lot of unforced errors.
robertearle
Well-known member
Good teams find ways to win when they don't play their best.
At this point, all the teams are really good; Florida is freaking huge, and really good. They had plenty to do with those "unforced errors".
True. It was an impressive comeback all things considered.
Hopefully they build on that.
Timothy A
Let's go RED!
Awesome......twitter was going crazy last night. Good thing I picked up on the match late in the night. I may have to watch the semi.
How does the player substitution work at this level? I don't understand it at all, which makes me not want to watch since I can't figure out Watts going on with the players. My experience in that was from playing in gradeschool 40 yrs ago. OH MY I am getting old!
robertearle
Well-known member
That is a simple question with a pretty complicated answer. I'll try not to geek out too badly, but here goes:
At its most basic, it is tall girls in the front row slamming the ball to the floor and short girls in the back keeping the other team's tall girl slams off the floor.
More detailed - six players on the floor at a time, six positions they are occupying; every time the serve changes from one team to the other, the team about to serve must rotate their players from their current position to the 'next' position. That means that every time the players rotate, one tall girl in front is rotating to the back while one short girl in back is rotating to the front. And that is when and why most of the substitution happens; to replace tall girls with short girls and short girls with tall girls.
Complication #1 - there is a limited number of substitutions per set. 15 in NCAA volleyball. That limit isn't all that 'bad' and teams don't often actually bump up against it, but that is because they go into a set having planned for it. And occasionally, teams do bump up against it. In last night's first set that went 'extra points', Wisconsin essentially ran out (had one left but had already changed their substitution pattern because they were so close and were saving that last one with a specific purpose in mind).
Complication #2 - not all substitutions count against that limit. And that's where we talk about the girl in the opposite colored jersey. She is called the 'libero' (I'm guessing Italian for "the free one", or something like that). The libero can sub in for two players and positions instead of only one (but with one minor restriction not worth going into here); other players are limited to one of the six positions; that is, short girl #1 subs in at the postion occupied by tall girl #1 the entire set. An alternate short girl #1 can come in at that position, as can an alternate tall girl. But someone who has 'been' short/tall #1 can't then come in at short/tall #2. At least not in the same set. The libero coming an going with the two 'middles' doesn't count against the limit; they are 'free'. (The libero does have other limits, but she is 'free' when it comes to the substitution count limit.)
Pretty much every team uses the libero to sub in for 'tall girl in the middle of the front row' (the middle blocker) because most of the time she is the tallest one and likely the one least capable of handling the 'keep the ball off the floor' back row duties. After that, the substitution 'pattern' is put in place by the coaches with the '15' limit in mind. If a team has a player who is tall enough to play in the front row but agile enough to handle back row duties, they will play that player through all six position rotations without every subbing her out. She's a "six rotation player" who "plays six around", thus saving on the substitution limit for other positions and players and delaying the point in time when the limit might be hit. Six rotation players are quite 'valuable'.
And after that, the ways and variations on how coaches come up with to vary the substitution patterns and use their 15 subs are myriad. The discussion Arlen and I were having has it is basis the choices the Minnesota coach made and could have made regarding his substitution pattern and use of his 15 subs in the match against Wisconsin to work around players missing due to injury and COVID, etc.
Questions welcomed; corrections welcomed. I hope that helps. (Watching to understand what a team is doing with their substitution pattern is a whole lot easier in person than it is on TV!)
-----------
(Adding 'short" and "tall' being relative terms here. The "short" girls are probably in the 5'8" to 5'10" range at the level we're talking about here, with "tall' being above and maybe well above 6 feet. But "short" can still mean short; I remember a half-dozen years ago Indiana had a girl who was listed at 4 foot 11 inches, and she actually played back row for them.)
Last edited:
Timothy A
Let's go RED!
So it's just like middle school with the rotations but you can essentially sub a bench player into any spot of the 6 spots on the floor at any given time with a limit on 15ish substitutions. (15 subs per set seems like a lot to this volleyball virgin.) I got confused with the 6 players seemingly being in random spots on the floor prior to the serve; not like middle school where there were 2 rows and you started each point in a very defined looking 2 rows of 3. During play essentially the 6 players can move to play the ball anywhere they want on the court, yes?
Can you sub a player onto and off the court more than once in a set?
Can you sub a player onto and off the court more than once in a set?
robertearle
Well-known member
Within the 15 sub limit, yes, short player #1 will go into and out of the game in exchange with tall player #1 two or three times during a given set. There is no limit on that, and in a conceivable-but-extreme case it could be four and maybe even five times, but practically the team would be up against the 15 sub limit by then. Every time the serve switches and the team is about to serve, the one-position rotation happens. So every six times the serve switches and the rotation happens, you have gone through a 'full rotation' and short #1 will have replaced tall #1 once and tall #1 will have replaced short #1 once. Twelve such switches in who is serving and they will have swapped on/off twice, etc. (Remember though that middles and libero substitutions don't count; practically middle #1 will go out and come back in the same two or three times during a set. like everyone else. The libero who is alternating in replacing both middle #1 and middle #2 goes in and out twice as often... only sometimes that in-and-out only happens on paper, and she never physically leaves the court. Isn't this fun?)
('Rotation' sometimes gets used to mean a single 'everybody move one spot' and sometimes it means 'we have gone through a full six moves and are back to where we started')
During play everyone can move anywhere they want, but they may be limited in what they can do while they are there. (Isn't this fun?) At the serve, players generally have to be arranged the way you remember, three in front and three in back; players in front are left and middle and right. But at the moment of serve - and maybe a moment before - they can move to where they want to be. So the tallest tall girl - the middle blocker - will move to the middle even if she is nominally 'on the left' or 'on the right' according to the 'official' rotation position. Sometimes you'll see the front row people lined up in a sort-of 'stack' all in the middle. That is so they can quickly get to where the want to be. For example, so long as the player officially is a couple inches 'left' when they're supposed to be left at the moment of the serve, they are OK. Front row players can - I think - go anywhere and do anything. Back row players can go anywhere, but they cannot 'attack' if they are close to the net; there is a 'ten foot line' that differentiates front and back. A tall girl playing 'six rotation' and in the back row at the moment can, for example, 'attack' - can jump and try to slam the ball to the floor - only if she takes off on her jump from behind the ten foot line. Because she is 'back row'. A 'back row' player can hit the ball over the net from in front of the ten foot line so long as she does so with one foot on the ground, so long as she doesn't jump and 'attack'. (There are a couple other ways a back row player near the net can do something that becomes an illegal 'back row attack' that I'm not sure I completely understand, but that's way too detailed and won't come up very often).
I said you asked a simple question with a complicated answer!
robertearle
Well-known member
Maybe going through a very 'typical' substitution pattern would help (this is in fact what Wisconsin's opponent Thursday night - Texas - does, as far as I know):
Six positions on the court to be accounted for, and the number of players who occupy them during one six-position 'rotation
1) tall girl #1 and short girl #1
2) tall girl #2 and short girl #2
3) tall girl #3 who plays all six 'positions' during one 'full rotation'
4) girl who plays the specialized 'setter' position; stays on the floor through all six 'positions' during one 'full rotation'; a sort-of specialized 'six rotation' player
5 and 6) tall girls 'middle blocker' # 1 and #2 who play in the front and can both be replaced by the same short girl libero in the back
So, nine players filling the six positions.
- Two who never leave the court, filling two positions
- three - libero and two middles - who together take up two positions, but who don't count against the sub limit
- two who take up one position, and will total two subs per full six position rotation; one when short girl replaces tall girl as the position is required to rotate from front to back, and one when tall girl comes back in when the position is required to rotate back to front.
- and two who take up similar one position and total two subs, short for tall and then tall for short.
Through a full six position rotation, this will use up four total substitutions. So they can go through the full six position rotation three times and still have only used 12 of the 15 subs. It would take a very close set where the teams trade single points back and forth, scoring only one point at a time, or a set that goes many 'extra points' - a set is to 25, but "win by two", remember - before the run into the sub limit. But some teams - Wisconsin, sometimes - do other things that require more substitutions, and then those last three substitutions can get used up in a long set.
Last edited:
robertearle
Well-known member
Texas did everything better tonight than Wisconsin (and significantly better than they did against Penn State and Nebraska in the previous rounds).
Not a lot better - first and third sets were as close as they can be. But better. They served Wisconsin 'out of system' pretty regularly, keeping Wisconsin scrambling around and unable to set 'quality' balls to their front row hitters. And conversely, handled Wisconsin's serve well to be able to put their hitters into good position to hit. 'Serve receive' was always going to be Wisconsin's weak spot this year, and Texas did a very good job exploiting it.
VERY disappointing. And surprising to me. If Texas had played the way they did vs Penn State and Nebraska, Wisconsin wins fairly easily. But they were much better than that tonight.
Not a lot better - first and third sets were as close as they can be. But better. They served Wisconsin 'out of system' pretty regularly, keeping Wisconsin scrambling around and unable to set 'quality' balls to their front row hitters. And conversely, handled Wisconsin's serve well to be able to put their hitters into good position to hit. 'Serve receive' was always going to be Wisconsin's weak spot this year, and Texas did a very good job exploiting it.
VERY disappointing. And surprising to me. If Texas had played the way they did vs Penn State and Nebraska, Wisconsin wins fairly easily. But they were much better than that tonight.
Last edited:
Timothy A
Let's go RED!
I went to bed mid second set and hoped when I got up I'd see a great comeback. Really bummed out. Glad to see they fought the 3rd set to the bitter end and didn't roll over after the bad second set. I guess the outcome reminds me of the men's loss to BSU in the men's tourney. BSU did a lot right and better than UW and a lot of that was UW not playing up to their potential. Great season though, getting to the FF is just about all you can ask for; to get your self in a position to go for the Natty.
Timothy A
Let's go RED!
So you think that they just couldn't overcome that? IDK much about volleyball, but there was a lot of match left at that point. From Watts Robert said, it seems to be that UW couldn't solve the challenges that UW faced. Strategically, Watts could they have done differently?
This Watts for what is almost seeping into me professional emails....To quote Kramer, "it's outta control!!!"
I don't think it was completely over, but they didn't play nearly as well in the second set and when you're down 2 sets to none to a great team, it makes it a nearly impossible comeback.
robertearle
Well-known member
Volleyball is very much a game of momentum. Getting the first set win could very well have changed the overall mindset and outcome... or it would have delayed the outcome we got by a half-hour. Nobody knows. It certainly reduced the 'margin for error' going forward. When they fought back in the third and actually took a lead (at 22-21 ?), I still thought 'get it to two sets to one and who knows...'. Around that point in the third, former UW coach Pete Waite was doing commentary on the radio broadcast, and he said something like "Momentum can be a beautiful thing."
Last edited:
robertearle
Well-known member
Maybe it is just the painful place my mind is today, but this reminds me of the Wisconsin loss to Stanford in the NCAA 'round of eight' at the Field House in 2016; Carlini and Haleigh Nelson's final game. Ugh!
Last edited:
ARM
Fan of chipmunk-like mascots.
That loss looks different in hindsight than it did in the moment. Instead of blowing a two-set lead versus a No. 6 seed, the Badgers lost to a dominant team that would win three of four championships.
It looked to me like Texas matched up well against UW. The Longhorns strength in the front line allowed them to hit with the Badgers better than a team like Nebraska that is weaker on the pins.
robertearle
Well-known member
The night before, Wisconsin played the first match in front of the sellout crowd (a five set "escape" vs Ohio State) and then with much of the crowd cleared out, Stanford played Florida State. Some guy I didn't know who had been sitting a couple rows up (nobody was in their normal season ticket seats - an NCAA game, not a "Wisconsin game") came and sat with me, and we talked through the second match. I remember him telling me how everyone was saying Stanford was "next year's team" with all the freshmen playing, but he thought the only reason they were a 6 seed and not higher was some early season losses, and that they might not wait for "next year", they might well do some damage this year, etc.
I was VERY much conscious of that conversation as the second set and the rest of the match played out the next night. I don't know who he was, but he was right on the money.
----------
I'll be interested to see if Texas can 'reproduce' their Thursday night effort tonight (though I can't say I know all that much about Kentucky; I watched Thursday, but my mind was 'elsewhere'.)
Last edited: