The Rivalry.

Penn State (11-0 and #1-ranked) takes on #16-ranked Wisconsin (8-2) tonight at 7 p.m. in Rec Hall to open its B1G schedule. This would be a much-anticipated match even if it were only the opening of the B1G season for the two teams.  But there’s history here: Penn State knocked off the Badgers 3-1 in the 2013 NCAA title match, followed that up with a B1G season-opening sweep of Wisconsin at the Field House on September 24, 2014,  and capped off the trilogy with a 3-1 win over the Badgers in the Regional Finals in December 2014.

Of course, many of the players on these teams are different from the players who played in those previous matches, and as Club Coach and Talking Head noted in their Match Preview Q&A on Monday, Coach Rose approaches every match — whether in-conference, ranked, or un-ranked — the same way: with respect for the opponent and preparation, preparation, preparation. That approach certainly has paid off this season, as Penn State has swept all 11 of its opponents (and won its last 38 consecutive sets).  It will be business as usual for the Nittany Lions.  And it should be a great match.

(click images for more info)

Date (Time)	Opp.	Site	Media
9-23-15 (7:00 p.m. ET)		Rec Hall Univ. Park, PA	TV - BTN

The Team, the Crowd and the Kick

Here’s Haleigh Washington (who was named this week’s B1G Player of the Week) talking with Tony Mancuso of GoPSUsports about the state of the team, the home court advantage, and The Kick:

Here’s a link to a replay of “The Kick”: http://www.snappytv.com/tc/837336

Wisconsin Coach Kelly Sheffield’s Monday Press Conference

(courtesy of Uwbadgers.com)

Opening Statement: “Coming off a 2-1 weekend, strong tournament, strong competition. Our first match against a really good Kansas State team. I think they were about 26th in the country. Lauren (Carlini) was a little bit off, she felt a little bit off, location was (off) a little bit — but I felt we got great performances out of Lauryn Gillis and Kelli Bates, Taylor Morey. I thought those three were really, really solid.

“We swept a really good Creighton team (and) our last match, we lost in five to a really talented Arkansas team. I thought Haleigh Nelson and Tionna Williams, Romana Kriskova, I think the three of them had their best matches in a Badger uniform. The thing right now is can we put all of these pieces together, get everybody on the same page and playing well together, but that’s the challenge in front of us but I think we’re headed in the right direction.

“This week we’ve got Penn State and been watching a lot of film. Obviously once again a very talented team that seems to be getting better every week that has an okay coach, has accomplished a couple things, leading the way (laughter). And an Ohio State team that may jump into the top 10 in this week’s polls, so we are certainly exited to get the Big Ten season under way.”

Typical Penn State kind of team? All-Americans, all big hitters?
“Gnarly, yeah. Their pins (hitters) are better than anybody else in the country. Their lefts and their rights are crazy talented, and they have a sophomore middle that is wicked and nasty, you know? They’ve got a new setter and I think she is getting a little bit more comfortable. A new libero, but the talent is still there. They are very well trained, typical Penn State team, meaning very, very good.

You mentioned a new setter, Micha Hancock was one of the dominant players. You got an eye full of her over the last couple of years. How different are they without her?
“Here is the thing, she had probably the best serve in the country, certainly the best serve on their team, and the new setter they have in right now is certainly the best server on their team, and she is really good. She is not quite Micha behind the service line, but she’s no slouch and she is quite good. They’re in fine hands.”

You tried (Kelli) Bates on the right side before I night. Is that something you plan to bring around again, or was it just to take a look at? Where do you see that shaking out?
“That’s a good question. I’m going to withhold that because if there is a little bit of intrigue, maybe we get 50 more fans to come out there and see what position Bates is going to play. Anything we can do from a marketing standpoint, we’re excited about!”

You may not be ranked as high as you were to start the season, you have lost two matches but are you a better team now than when the team first took the floor to start the year?
“That’s a good question. Absolutely! Preseason rankings are so much about the previous season, you see that in every sport. We understand why you have it, it gives people something to talk about and generates some interest and that’s great, but I couldn’t even tell you what we were ranked coming out of the gate.

“I’m not even positive what we were ranked this past week. We don’t really talk about it. Can we find ways to get better. Here is what I know. We had three of our players our last match play their best matches of the year and the beginning of the weekend we had three other players that play awfully, awfully well. Our ceiling is getting a little higher with some players and can we find a way to mesh that up. That’s on the coaches. I have been changing things around quite a bit to try and figure out how these pieces are going to fit. Once the coaching staff gets out of the way and let’s them go, I think we will probably have a chance of being pretty good.”

In the standings, obviously every game, every match is the exact same as far as worth in the standings column, but seeing Penn State, the opportunity to play them again in any way, does that mean more to your team?
“As a competitor, I would hope so. Our goal is to try to compete for a national championship and you’re going against a team that has won the last two. Although their personnel is different, I think what it shows is you are going up against a program that has storied excellence to it and our players to want feel that.

“I think they’re also equally jacked up to be opening up Big Ten, and I’m not sure who you have in front of you — our players are still going to be excited – might be a little more juice because of who it is. On the flip side, we won a Big Ten Conference championship last year, and that was something that was pretty big for us. I’m sure there are quite a few players that are — although (Penn State) won the whole enchilada, I’m sure they feel that’s rightfully theirs and they’re probably going to be packing a little bit more juice as well.”

Looking at the Big Ten conference this year, always good in volleyball, but does it seem top-to-bottom it’s one of the stronger ones that you’ve seen in a while?
“I haven’t really been around that long, I’m still kind of a newbie myself, but coaches that have been around for a while, yeah, they all talk about this has got to be as deep as it’s ever been. Funny thing is I heard that a couple of years ago as well. It’s hard to put your finger on too many teams that aren’t better than what they’ve been last year or the year before. Almost everybody seems like they’re better. This conference returns a lot of talent and it’s a lot of coaches that have been here as well, you don’t have any turnover. You’ve got some people with familiarity.

Kelly, wouldn’t you rather play Penn State twice a year as opposed to only once?
“Love playing against great competition so yeah. I don’t sit there and waste a whole lot of energy on … We’re having great discussions, I’m sure most of the sports are, of how this scheduling is going to work out. There are so many teams. You’ve got a 14-team conference, and you’re trying to figure out a way to get 20 matches in. It’s really tough, and I’m sure all the sports are trying to figure out, all right, what’s equal, what’s fair, and it’s kind of a tough challenge.

“We’re having some discussions on the front-end of that, but once that schedule gets out in front, I don’t sit there and judge at all. But if you’re asking me to remove myself from that, would I have rather play that team twice? Yeah. As a competitor you live for those types of matches; I know our players do, I know our coaching staff does. If you’re a competitive junky, nothing is better than those types of teams.”

Penn State beats a lot of people, that goes without saying, but when you go over the last few years and they beat you this time and that time and the other time, how do you kind of keep making adjustments as a coach, or is it a recipe where you add a little of this and a little of that and hope it works? How do you keep making adjustments against a team like this?
“First of all, I appreciate the emphasis on ‘They beat you this time and that time and this time,’ and I thought you were going to add that for every single time we lost to them. We would have been here for a while! (Laughter.)

“It’s different personnel, their game is expanding but we have different personnel. To me, it’s one of the great things about watching the amount of film we do. The first time that you watch somebody, and it’s almost everybody, you sit there and say, ‘Man, we are just going to get clobbered by this team, this team is so filthy.’ The more you watch them you start seeing, all right, maybe we can do this or maybe this is what they’re trying to do, and you start figuring things out a little bit and that process is really, really enjoyable.

“We go into every match believing that there is a way to win and we go into every match believing that we can win. It doesn’t matter if it’s (Penn State) or whoever else but, yeah, there is a little bit of an element. We’ve gone back and watched the matches we played against them last year as well and all right, what are they trying to do and you try to study that.

“At the end of the day, you probably have way more information than what you need and how do you get rid of the fluff and get to the essence of it and let the kids go out there and ball!”

Stat Joust

Below are the team and individual rankings in the B1G in various statistical categories.  We’ve highlighted the Penn State, Wisconsin and Minnesota rankings (with vague approximations of their team colors):

Penn State’s .336 team attack % ranks 2nd in NCAA D1

Hitting Percentage	S	K	E	TA	Pct.
Penn State	33	442	107	998	0.336
Nebraska	36	533	161	1260	0.295
Minnesota	34	486	155	1169	0.283
Iowa	46	654	218	1562	0.279
Purdue	37	525	193	1257	0.264
Illinois	37	522	182	1289	0.264
Wisconsin	35	513	183	1270	0.260
Michigan State	39	590	227	1409	0.258
Ohio State	43	625	239	1577	0.245
Northwestern	34	464	184	1221	0.229
Michigan	39	541	206	1488	0.225
Indiana	49	653	288	1626	0.224
Maryland	51	642	266	1705	0.221
Rutgers	43	532	234	1501	0.199

 Penn State has limited its opponents to an .091 attack % — #1 in the NCAA

Opp. Hitting Pct.	S	K	E	TA	Pct.
Penn State	30	308	217	997	0.091
Purdue	37	386	229	1250	0.126
Ohio State	43	444	250	1495	0.130
Illinois	37	407	230	1282	0.138
Wisconsin	35	400	214	1261	0.148
Michigan	39	475	250	1476	0.152
Minnesota	34	383	199	1152	0.160
Northwestern	34	391	195	1192	0.164
Indiana	49	487	239	1459	0.170
Michigan State	39	428	204	1309	0.171
Nebraska	36	410	191	1280	0.171
Iowa	46	546	245	1551	0.194
Maryland	51	610	282	1638	0.200
Rutgers	43	598	200	1558	0.255

 

Kills	S	No.	Avg./S
Michigan State	39	590	15.13
Nebraska	36	533	14.81
Wisconsin	35	513	14.66
Ohio State	43	625	14.53
Minnesota	34	486	14.29
Iowa	46	654	14.22
Purdue	37	525	14.19
Illinois	37	522	14.11
Michigan	39	541	13.87
Northwestern	34	464	13.65
Penn State	33	442	13.39
Indiana	49	653	13.33
Maryland	51	642	12.59
Rutgers	43	532	12.37

Penn State’s average of 3.42 blocks/set ranks #1 in the NCAA so far this season.  (The Nittany Lions also have out blocked their opponents  113.0 – 39.0).

Blocks	S	BS	BA	Total	Avg./S
Penn State	33	28	170	113.0	3.42
Minnesota	34	21	158	100.0	2.94
Illinois	37	26	152	102.0	2.76
Wisconsin	35	12	169	96.5	2.76
Michigan State	39	17	164	99.0	2.54
Ohio State	43	28	156	106.0	2.47
Purdue	37	22	136	90.0	2.43
Maryland	51	34	176	122.0	2.39
Nebraska	36	15	140	85.0	2.36
Michigan	39	24	116	82.0	2.10
Northwestern	34	23	95	70.5	2.07
Iowa	46	22	134	89.0	1.93
Rutgers	43	13	132	79.0	1.84
Indiana	49	19	141	89.5	1.83

 

Service Aces	S	No.	Avg./S
Purdue	37	61	1.65
Indiana	49	74	1.51
Maryland	51	77	1.51
Penn State	33	47	1.42
Iowa	46	62	1.35
Minnesota	34	46	1.35
Northwestern	34	40	1.18
Michigan State	39	44	1.13
Rutgers	43	48	1.12
Ohio State	43	46	1.07
Illinois	37	38	1.03
Nebraska	36	33	0.92
Michigan	39	30	0.77
Wisconsin	35	26	0.74

 

Digs	S	No.	Avg./S
Michigan	39	654	16.77
Nebraska	36	586	16.28
Wisconsin	35	566	16.17
Ohio State	43	693	16.12
Michigan State	39	610	15.64
Illinois	37	559	15.11
Purdue	37	556	15.03
Northwestern	34	509	14.97
Rutgers	43	629	14.63
Iowa	46	662	14.39
Minnesota	34	481	14.15
Penn State	33	448	13.58
Indiana	49	621	12.67
Maryland	51	633	12.41

Haleigh Washington’s .538 attack % is #1 in the NCAA.

Hitting Percentage	S	K	E	TA	Pct.
Haleigh Washington, Penn State	33	89	11	145	0.538
Meghan Haggerty, Nebraska	18	36	7	63	0.460
Faye Adelaja, Purdue	26	59	13	105	0.438
Paige Tapp, Minnesota	34	92	20	174	0.414
Taylor Sandbothe, Ohio State	43	139	23	282	0.411
Katie Stadick, Illinois	35	103	21	203	0.404
Haleigh Nelson, Wisconsin	35	87	17	175	0.400
Abby Cole, Michigan	36	112	19	236	0.394
Jazzmine McDonald, Indiana	23	41	9	84	0.381
Mikaela Gunderson, Iowa	46	103	18	225	0.378
Maddie Slater, Northwestern	34	68	17	137	0.372
Mikaela Foecke, Nebraska	36	103	20	226	0.367
Aiyana Whitney, Penn State	33	105	28	220	0.350
Danielle Cuttino, Purdue	37	71	21	143	0.350
Cecilia Hall, Nebraska	33	67	24	129	0.333

 

(Must have at least 3.33 attacks per set)

Kills	S	No.	Avg./S
Meme Fletcher, Rutgers	28	135	4.82
Daly Santana, Minnesota	34	156	4.59
Annie Drews, Purdue	37	160	4.32
Elizabeth Campbell, Ohio State	43	182	4.23
Amelia Anderson, Indiana	49	198	4.04
Symone Abbott, Northwestern	34	127	3.74
Jocelynn Birks, Illinois	31	114	3.68
Lauren Brobst, Iowa	46	167	3.63
Michelle Strizak, Illinois	35	126	3.60
Kelli Bates, Wisconsin	35	119	3.40
Lauryn Gillis, Wisconsin	35	117	3.34
Brooke Kranda, Michigan State	39	130	3.33
Chloe Reinig, Michigan State	23	75	3.26
Taylor Sandbothe, Ohio State	43	139	3.23
Aiyana Whitney, Penn State	33	105	3.18

 

Assists	S	No.	Avg./S
Lauren Carlini, Wisconsin	35	412	11.77
Loxley Keala, Iowa	46	533	11.59
Kelly Hunter, Nebraska	36	405	11.25
Taylor Tashima, Northwestern	34	381	11.21
S Seliger-Swenson, Minnesota	33	368	11.15
Ashley Evans, Purdue	37	411	11.11
Jordyn Poulter, Illinois	32	349	10.91
Bryanna Weiskircher, Penn State	33	331	10.03
Megan Tallman, Indiana	39	376	9.64
Rachel Minarick, Michigan State	38	342	9.00
Anna Sudbury, Rutgers	38	342	9.00
Taylor Hughes, Ohio State	32	272	8.50
Makayla Lundin, Indiana	18	142	7.89
Carly Warner, Michigan	39	288	7.38
Emily Ruetter, Ohio State	32	214	6.69

 

Service Aces	S	No.	Avg./S
Brooke Smith, Nebraska	11	6	0.55
Brooke Peters, Purdue	37	19	0.51
Holly Toliver, Michigan State	20	9	0.45
Abby Bentz, Maryland	47	18	0.38
Annika Albrecht, Nebraska	36	13	0.36
Megan Tallman, Indiana	39	13	0.33
Bryanna Weiskircher, Penn State	33	11	0.33
Amanda Neill, Purdue	37	12	0.32
Abbie Kraus, Northwestern	34	11	0.32
Taylor Krause, Penn State	19	6	0.32
Taylor Lebo, Indiana	44	13	0.30
Ali Stark, Illinois	37	11	0.30
Molly Kelly, Iowa	45	13	0.29
Rachel Minarick, Michigan State	38	11	0.29
Molly Lohman, Minnesota	34	10	0.29
Dalianliz Rosado, Minnesota	34	10	0.29

Haleigh Washington’s 1.58 blocks/set ranks 7th in the NCAA

Blocks	S	BS	BA	Total	Avg./S
Amber Rolfzen, Nebraska	22	3	33	36	1.64
Haleigh Washington, Penn State	33	8	44	52	1.58
Danielle Cuttino, Purdue	37	8	43	51	1.38
Heidi Thelen, Penn State	33	5	40	45	1.36
Paige Tapp, Minnesota	34	8	37	45	1.32
Katie Stadick, Illinois	35	5	41	46	1.31
Haleigh Nelson, Wisconsin	35	5	40	45	1.29
Molly Lohman, Minnesota	34	6	38	44	1.29
Tionna Williams, Wisconsin	31	3	35	38	1.23
Megan Tompkins, Michigan State	35	3	39	42	1.20
Abby Cole, Michigan	36	13	30	43	1.19
Taylor Sandbothe, Ohio State	43	11	37	48	1.12
Gabrielle Hazen, Northwestern	33	7	30	37	1.12
Ali Bastianelli, Illinois	36	7	33	40	1.11
Awele Nwaeze, Indiana	35	9	30	39	1.11

 

Digs	S	No.	Avg./S
Valeria Leon, Ohio State	43	228	5.30
Caroline Niedospial, Northwestern	34	180	5.29
Taylor Morey, Wisconsin	35	171	4.89
Annika Olsen, Iowa	46	218	4.74
Brandi Donnelly, Illinois	37	169	4.57
Dalianliz Rosado, Minnesota	34	142	4.18
Justine Wong-Orantes, Nebraska	36	150	4.17
Amanda Neill, Purdue	37	154	4.16
Amy Dion, Maryland	51	211	4.14
Tiffany Morales, Michigan	37	141	3.81
Keeton Holcomb, Penn State	32	116	3.63
Kristen Muir, Michigan State	39	133	3.41
Ali Schroeter, Rutgers	43	143	3.33
Carly Warner, Michigan	39	130	3.33
Abby Monson, Michigan State	39	130	3.33