[cardcrimson]

Service errors also had another benefit.  They gave MN points without the momentum and confidence of a massive kill.  They got the point, but they were not getting sweet sets or team inspiring kills that might help the team get into a better rhythm. 

You're kidding, right?

Not at all.  In the WI vs Baylor contest.   Baylor by set #4 was done.   The hitters were really frustrated.   The setter was tired from running around all night.   The WI serves were the key in that contest.  And to get that level of frustration from a serve based strategy you more or less need to accept some errors may creep in too.   WI had fewer errors, but I bet they would have been OK with a few more errors to keep Baylor from finding its high flying groove. 

In the Stanford/MN game.  The MN big hitters were rarely on a roll.   For stretches in the contest they went several minutes between satisfying and crowd pleasing kills for their outside hitters.   To be honest, I had to look at their season stats to figure out which players were the primary targets during the season because we were not seeing them distribute the ball well during the game.

The goal is not to serve errors, but denying the other team's outside hitters the opportunity for a satisfying, momentum building, in system kill is at least a silver lining.

Evidence for the love of the aggressive approach is right there with Kate Formico.   All season long it seemed like she would sub in and immediately tally a service error.  And yet, all season long she has had the same aggressive approach.   If it was something the staff wanted to avoid, it would seem easy enough to tell her to improve the percentage.   However, when she doesn't hit a service error the team wins a lot of her points.   The good with the bad and all.

Got it. Interesting strategy, who knew a service error was better than putting the ball in play. Perhaps we can employ it continuously all the way to a national championship. Wisconsin's.

[cardcrimson]

Service errors also had another benefit.  They gave MN points without the momentum and confidence of a massive kill.  They got the point, but they were not getting sweet sets or team inspiring kills that might help the team get into a better rhythm. 

You're kidding, right?

Not at all.  In the WI vs Baylor contest.   Baylor by set #4 was done.   The hitters were really frustrated.   The setter was tired from running around all night.   The WI serves were the key in that contest.  And to get that level of frustration from a serve based strategy you more or less need to accept some errors may creep in too.   WI had fewer errors, but I bet they would have been OK with a few more errors to keep Baylor from finding its high flying groove. 

In the Stanford/MN game.  The MN big hitters were rarely on a roll.   For stretches in the contest they went several minutes between satisfying and crowd pleasing kills for their outside hitters.   To be honest, I had to look at their season stats to figure out which players were the primary targets during the season because we were not seeing them distribute the ball well during the game.

The goal is not to serve errors, but denying the other team's outside hitters the opportunity for a satisfying, momentum building, in system kill is at least a silver lining.

Evidence for the love of the aggressive approach is right there with Kate Formico.   All season long it seemed like she would sub in and immediately tally a service error.  And yet, all season long she has had the same aggressive approach.   If it was something the staff wanted to avoid, it would seem easy enough to tell her to improve the percentage.   However, when she doesn't hit a service error the team wins a lot of her points.   The good with the bad and all.

Got it. Interesting strategy, who knew a service error was better than putting the ball in play. Perhaps we can employ it continuously all the way to a national championship. Wisconsin's.

[Griffins78]

Also, we often serve “knuckleballs” that can move unpredictability and make it difficult to receive and pass. Sometimes that movement is down and can move into the net.

[Griffins78]

Also, we often serve “knuckleballs” that can move unpredictability and make it difficult to receive and pass. Sometimes that movement is down and can move into the net.

[M T]

Got it. Interesting strategy, who knew a service error was better than putting the ball in play. Perhaps we can employ it continuously all the way to a national championship. Wisconsin's.

You seem not to get it.  Let me put it in football terms.   If you want your receiver to catch the football, you throw it right to his chest, and slow enough for him to catch it.  Why in the world would you throw a bullet and  to where he has to jump to catch it, or really stretch to get it?   Doing so makes it more likely that you'll be off just enough so he doesn't catch it.  So, your completion rate goes down.  If all one cared about was missed passes, that would be a bad strategy.   But the number of missed passes isn't what counts in the long run.

Neither does the number of aces & service errors.

[M T]

Got it. Interesting strategy, who knew a service error was better than putting the ball in play. Perhaps we can employ it continuously all the way to a national championship. Wisconsin's.

You seem not to get it.  Let me put it in football terms.   If you want your receiver to catch the football, you throw it right to his chest, and slow enough for him to catch it.  Why in the world would you throw a bullet and  to where he has to jump to catch it, or really stretch to get it?   Doing so makes it more likely that you'll be off just enough so he doesn't catch it.  So, your completion rate goes down.  If all one cared about was missed passes, that would be a bad strategy.   But the number of missed passes isn't what counts in the long run.

Neither does the number of aces & service errors.

[cardcrimson]

Got it. Interesting strategy, who knew a service error was better than putting the ball in play. Perhaps we can employ it continuously all the way to a national championship. Wisconsin's.

You seem not to get it.  Let me put it in football terms.   If you want your receiver to catch the football, you throw it right to his chest, and slow enough for him to catch it.  Why in the world would you throw a bullet and  to where he has to jump to catch it, or really stretch to get it?   Doing so makes it more likely that you'll be off just enough so he doesn't catch it.  So, your completion rate goes down.  If all one cared about was missed passes, that would be a bad strategy.   But the number of missed passes isn't what counts in the long run.

Neither does the number of aces & service errors.

No. I get it just fine. Thanks for your tolerance of my ignorance, though.

Farm93 posited that a service error was better than hitting it in play and allowing the other team a chance for a momentum building kill. I found that to be a ludicrous statement. Stunned that you and others support that conjecture. Funny, I thought Morgan Hentz to be one of the best defensive specialists in the country and our blockers really, really good. Clearly my ignorance to trust our defense is showing. Thanks for clearing that up.

Not that it matters, but our ace to service error last night was about the worst we've had all season. If you don't see that as something to improve for the championship match, fine. As for a football analogy, lets run four straight plays into the heart of MSU's defense, cause that's what we do.

---

Also, we often serve “knuckleballs” that can move unpredictability and make it difficult to receive and pass. Sometimes that movement is down and can move into the net.

Understand, though I didn't see a lot of float serves last night. The key is no spin, either on the toss or after the hit. Also, the best are when the ball valve hole is down. . . .

[cardcrimson]

Got it. Interesting strategy, who knew a service error was better than putting the ball in play. Perhaps we can employ it continuously all the way to a national championship. Wisconsin's.

You seem not to get it.  Let me put it in football terms.   If you want your receiver to catch the football, you throw it right to his chest, and slow enough for him to catch it.  Why in the world would you throw a bullet and  to where he has to jump to catch it, or really stretch to get it?   Doing so makes it more likely that you'll be off just enough so he doesn't catch it.  So, your completion rate goes down.  If all one cared about was missed passes, that would be a bad strategy.   But the number of missed passes isn't what counts in the long run.

Neither does the number of aces & service errors.

No. I get it just fine. Thanks for your tolerance of my ignorance, though.

Farm93 posited that a service error was better than hitting it in play and allowing the other team a chance for a momentum building kill. I found that to be a ludicrous statement. Stunned that you and others support that conjecture. Funny, I thought Morgan Hentz to be one of the best defensive specialists in the country and our blockers really, really good. Clearly my ignorance to trust our defense is showing. Thanks for clearing that up.

Not that it matters, but our ace to service error last night was about the worst we've had all season. If you don't see that as something to improve for the championship match, fine. As for a football analogy, lets run four straight plays into the heart of MSU's defense, cause that's what we do.

---

Also, we often serve “knuckleballs” that can move unpredictability and make it difficult to receive and pass. Sometimes that movement is down and can move into the net.

Understand, though I didn't see a lot of float serves last night. The key is no spin, either on the toss or after the hit. Also, the best are when the ball valve hole is down. . . .

[2006alum]

Somehow a thread that should be thrilling and exciting (we're back in the championship game again!) has turned tedious and repetitive. Let's refocus: our women's team is on the brink of 3 championships in 4 years and a 3rd national championship for Stanford in as many weeks. One more win to go.

So I say, GO CARDINAL.

[2006alum]

Somehow a thread that should be thrilling and exciting (we're back in the championship game again!) has turned tedious and repetitive. Let's refocus: our women's team is on the brink of 3 championships in 4 years and a 3rd national championship for Stanford in as many weeks. One more win to go.

So I say, GO CARDINAL.

[Spiny_Norman]

Somehow a thread that should be thrilling and exciting (we're back in the championship game again!) has turned tedious and repetitive. Let's refocus: our women's team is on the brink of 3 championships in 4 years and a 3rd national championship for Stanford in as many weeks. One more win to go.

So I say, GO CARDINAL.

I am excited but slightly wistful (full of wist?). Tomorrow will be the last time we get to watch Jenna Gray, Morgan Hentz, Audriana Fitzmorris and Kathryn Plummer play for Stanford. Man, it's been fun the last 4 years but they sure passed quickly.

[Spiny_Norman]

Somehow a thread that should be thrilling and exciting (we're back in the championship game again!) has turned tedious and repetitive. Let's refocus: our women's team is on the brink of 3 championships in 4 years and a 3rd national championship for Stanford in as many weeks. One more win to go.

So I say, GO CARDINAL.

I am excited but slightly wistful (full of wist?). Tomorrow will be the last time we get to watch Jenna Gray, Morgan Hentz, Audriana Fitzmorris and Kathryn Plummer play for Stanford. Man, it's been fun the last 4 years but they sure passed quickly.

[mbdude]

https://www.facebook.com/NCAAvolleyball/...524273038/

Plummer interview

[mbdude]

https://www.facebook.com/NCAAvolleyball/...524273038/

Plummer interview

[oldalum]

Tomorrow will be the last time we get to watch Jenna Gray, Morgan Hentz, Audriana Fitzmorris and Kathryn Plummer play for Stanford.

Fortunately there's a lot of them on YouTube. Once when I wanted some inspiration I watched the 5th set of the championship match from last year.

[oldalum]

Tomorrow will be the last time we get to watch Jenna Gray, Morgan Hentz, Audriana Fitzmorris and Kathryn Plummer play for Stanford.

Fortunately there's a lot of them on YouTube. Once when I wanted some inspiration I watched the 5th set of the championship match from last year.

[martyup]

Go CARD! Bring home the trophy!

[martyup]

Go CARD! Bring home the trophy!

[BobK]

It’s time. Go Card.

[BobK]

It’s time. Go Card.

[FarmBoy]

It’s time.  Go Card.

Making it look easy.

[FarmBoy]

It’s time.  Go Card.

Making it look easy.

[BobK]

25-16 first set win. But it’s starts over with set 2

[BobK]

25-16 first set win. But it’s starts over with set 2

[qwerty49]

Gates hits that slide so well.

[qwerty49]

Gates hits that slide so well.

[Canalejas]

What a great start. The Stanford serve rarely allowed Wisconsin to play in system.

[Canalejas]

What a great start. The Stanford serve rarely allowed Wisconsin to play in system.

[cardcoug]

I know almost nothing about volleyball, but wow, Plummer is amazing.

[cardcoug]

I know almost nothing about volleyball, but wow, Plummer is amazing.

[BostonCard]

20-15 in the second set so far.

BC

---

25-17 we win the second set.

Two-zip.  Come one, one more!

BC

[BostonCard]

20-15 in the second set so far.

BC

---

25-17 we win the second set.

Two-zip.  Come one, one more!

BC

[Canalejas]

Let’s close it out! Go Stanford!!

[Canalejas]

Let’s close it out! Go Stanford!!

[cardcrimson]

According to the commentators and the other coach, Stanford is losing the serve pass battle...Hum. . . .

Great commentary by the Wisky coach: Plummer has to be the best non-All-American, ever.

[cardcrimson]

According to the commentators and the other coach, Stanford is losing the serve pass battle...Hum. . . .

Great commentary by the Wisky coach: Plummer has to be the best non-All-American, ever.

[Hurlburt88]

Fear the tree!    Let’s close this out!

[Hurlburt88]

Fear the tree!    Let’s close this out!

[BostonCard]

Man, they should have put Plummer in for a couple points in a couple sets just so she could qualify for the all-America team.

BC

---

Here's a predictions article for all remaining matches:

https://www.ncaa.com/news/volleyball-wom...redictions

Geaux Cardinal!  Beat Utah!

The article was pretty spot on until this part...

I am going to stick with my original prediction all along, because why change it now right? Wisconsin wins it. The Badgers are the 2019 national champions. 

BC

[BostonCard]

Man, they should have put Plummer in for a couple points in a couple sets just so she could qualify for the all-America team.

BC

---

Here's a predictions article for all remaining matches:

https://www.ncaa.com/news/volleyball-wom...redictions

Geaux Cardinal!  Beat Utah!

The article was pretty spot on until this part...

I am going to stick with my original prediction all along, because why change it now right? Wisconsin wins it. The Badgers are the 2019 national champions. 

BC