THS99
-
Posts
133 -
Joined
Posts posted by THS99
-
-
1 hour ago, kenny powers said:
As a whole accurate, but BH just beat Canyon 2-0 according to maxpreps. Not sure how they could be ranked behind them
The overall strength of Canyon's schedule probably plays into the ranking. Canyon has a similar argument as well. They just beat Rouse, who is ahead of them by 1 in the TVI rankings. If you look at mutual opponents on MaxPreps, it's pretty close. They have beaten Deer Park and lost to both Grand Oaks and Lake Travis, but they did take sets off of GO and LT. All in all, the ranking is pretty close.
-
1 hour ago, Fortheloveofthegame said:
@FortheloveofthegameUpdate the sets then, I hear ya. The coach should update it but if they don't help he girls get the respect they deserve by reporting atleast W/Ls. I always wondered why the rest of the state updates but SETX doesn't. It seems like lack of education on expectations or maybe its that volleyball just isn't that big a deal in that part of the state which ties back to the lack of big time club volleyball in the area.
1 hour ago, Fortheloveofthegame said:Being married to a coach, he (my husband) always make sure he reports his wins/losses/stats/etc. I agree on the fact of volleyball not being a big deal to about 90% of the area. My daughter has played club for years and it's growing, especially compared to how small it was 5 years ago, but the local interest is nowhere near where it could be.
It is such a disservice to the local girls that VB stats are either severely underreported on MaxPreps or just flat-out wrong, whether intentional or accidental. It makes it even more annoying when you know that VB teams have managers and multiple Assistant Coaches who can help get these stats in quickly. Hell, there are services now that directly import stats into MaxPreps, it doesn't have to be a manual process anymore.
Getting stats updated, quickly and correctly, in MaxPreps helps to get kids the recognition they deserve, but it seems like too many programs in this area are just not concerned with pumping up their own players.
The Houston Chronicle uses MaxPreps for their player rankings and if you know a little about VB in this area, you can tell that deserving players are missing or some that are listed have incredibly inflated stats.
-
On 6/19/2023 at 3:04 PM, Pkvalt said:
I think Manvel will take a step back this year. They lost their 2 big outsides that they ran 90% of their offense through and their assistant who according to parents I have talked to basically did everything and was their real coach.
Huffman and BH will continue to be strong. They didn’t lose a lot of seniors.
They still have some weapons (a great setter, good hitting, and a plus defender), but they are losing kids to Iowa Colony and other schools in that area.
Agreed on Huffman and BH being strong again this year.
-
On 5/25/2023 at 4:34 PM, kenny powers said:
Who knew winning a game against a depleted BH team could get you a raise and a promotion!
Even that team should have won the match if basic strategies were followed.
-
10 hours ago, TommyShep said:
Had the chance to match the offer but they told her NO
Good move for PNG. Right now, BH is still the apex VB program by a mile. However, their dominance is chiefly due to the superior quantity & quality of player talent, especially with their current senior class, and not due to superior coaching. When BH's current seniors are gone after this season, it should shock anyone if another program (PNG) really challenges them and/or overtakes them. PNG's new coach has already shown that she is the best VB coach in the district and it looks like that area is starting to develop more VB talent.
-
If the leadership roles for the district awards committee are correct then that would definitely explain those results. It is what it is at this point, but these district participation awards don’t have a whole lot value or meaning at this point.
-
10 hours ago, Steven Avery said:
Not sure how a team that finished 2nd and was dominated in both matchups with the 1st place team ended up with two major awards, how the 3rd place team was shutout completely but yet the distant 4th place team got two awards? Seems like some major collusion between the 2nd place and the 4th place team. Had the 2nd place team Sterling beaten BH one time I could see sharing some coach and player awards but BH dominated 6-0 in sets in those two losses.
The awards selections really don't make any sense at all. I could see even distributions like that (1st place through 4th place) if the district was close, but it really wasn't close at all. Good for the girls from 2nd and 4th, but it sure does seem like sour grapes with how their coaches voted. I thought we stopped giving out participation awards after we left the YMCA?
-
5 minutes ago, BHFAN said:
Freaking Texan Live! Idiots
Game won't be streamed, just heard back from them via email. Pretty ridiculous. I bet either school could do a better job of broadcasting the game. How do you not have your operation ready?
-
21 minutes ago, CCRed said:
Hmm. Texanlive broadcast doesn’t seem to be working.
Yep, the game is completely off their website now.
-
2 hours ago, Pkvalt said:
Agreed. I was surprised we got so many. The coaches got together and voted. Of course they fought for their players for certain things. It didn’t turn out the way I thought it would to be honest.
Yeah, I was pretty surprised how the major awards and first team awards were distributed for this district. It definitely looks like there is an agreement to evenly distribute awards, which IMO waters down post season awards. Not saying there aren't other worthy players, but a few of the major awards and 1st team placements were head-scratchers for me.
-
3 hours ago, kenny powers said:
Interesting, in Nederland's win that was heard around the golden triangle, the MVP, the Newcomer and a 1st teamer were all missing that game for BH. I am sure it had nothing to do with the outcome though. Just a classic case of next man up right 😉
The sad thing is though as big as those three losses were, a team with the talent of BH should have been able to construct a game plan to overcome those losses. Looking at the video on Neds YouTube page, you can clearly see a game plan wasn't in place for BH. The Eagles are very talented, but something different needs to click for them to get over the hump.
-
It is beyond me why Forney isn't utilizing their big WR more.
-
8 hours ago, Pkvalt said:
There’s a couple of surprises for 17-5A
I am curious how district picks for volleyball are distributed. In my past experience, albeit in another district and with football / baseball, district picks were skewed toward the winner; especially if the winner has such a wide margin. It looks picks were fairly even between the top four teams. No offense, but that just doesn't make sense to me.
-
2 minutes ago, Pkvalt said:
My 2 cents…that game was good for both teams. Nederland gets a confidence boost heading into a tough 1st round game against Friendswood. Frankly, BH probably needed to lose before playoffs. They haven’t really been tested since preseason. Got it over with, know they are beatable, and they will for sure use that as fuel going into a long playoff run. Regardless of the situation/lineups, win win for both teams.
Agree. BH will be just fine for the playoffs, at least the first two rounds. Last night proved that they are thin at a very critical position, but at full strength they will be okay. Congrats to Nederland on the win. They should celebrate and enjoy it while they can, because their reward is a Friendswood team that is as equally talented as a full strength BH squad.
-
23 hours ago, Cougtalk said:
Crosby finally dominated a game... granted versus Sterling
Sterling is HISD level bad right now. You guys could have easily dropped 100 on them if fully healthy. Hell you came pretty close to it with injuries.
-
21 minutes ago, KF89 said:
No jets too cool, just gave Nederland team credit for getting a solid upset win over the top team in 5A. No disrespect to BH was stated at all, still one of the top vball programs in the state. Injuries & playing different lineups because of it are part of every teams season, so if you want to use it as excuses to down play the Nederland ladies beating BH & blame the loss with your opinion on the BH ladies in the lineup cool. I am positive the BH coaches will not. Wish BH & Nederland a good playoff run.
Mike "The Jet" Hiltz😎
After seeing these posts I pulled up Nederland's youtube video of the game....and all I have to say is WOW. Major props to the Nederland girls for getting the win, their coach had them prepared and ready to play. They executed their strategies and game plan better than BH did, kept it simple and direct. Even though BH still arguably had more player talent on the court, Nederland for sure won the coaching battle.
On the other hand, it definitely looked like the BH team was completely unprepared to play with their new lineups. Looked like they were missing their main setter and couple of net players, but that isn't a real excuse. A team of this level should be able to go more than one deep at any position, that deficiency falls on coaching and development. Not sure what BH's game plan was, if they even had one, but it didn't work. On multiple instances, in all sets, the BH offense just looked lost...WAY too many junior high level mistakes.
-
4 hours ago, SetHaGoEagles! said:
Santa Fe vs Texas City?
Looks like Santa Fe beat TC. Barring multiple players not playing for FW on Tuesday, they should beat La Porte. What are the tie breakers for district play? TC and La Porte should have the same district record and split the head-to-head matchup. Only difference is that La Porte won more sets in head-to-head. Would they still have a play-in?
-
34 minutes ago, Cougtalk said:
As far as I'm aware no recruiting violations have been proven, or even brought to the Executive Committee. I think the difference is the level of proof. Also, San Marcos was just made playoff eligible last week.
Also, the number of students does matter.
San Marcos High School was declared eligible for the playoffs, but it is a different story for the students. Their ineligibility was extended to a total of three years. Hopefully this doesn’t happen here. I don’t believe in being overly punitive to students, a calendar year should be fitting. However, it looks like the Executive Committee has a different approach.
-
47 minutes ago, Cougtalk said:
Just a question for yall, Is he eligible right now? or is he serving a suspension by the DC? Also, normally the penalty is a year ban. There are some instances of longer bans but those generally require faking residency. So why do you think he will be ineligible next year? I'm genuinely interested, and I'm not finding instances of complete bans on students, almost always the UIL rules ineligible for the remainder of season.
Also anyone else that has actionable knowledge about this process would be welcome to chime in.
To be clear this is what the UIL Parent Manual Says:
"A student who changes schools for athletic purposes is not eligible to compete in varsity UIL athletic contest(s) at the school to which he or she moves for at least one calendar year, even if both parents move to the new school district attendance zone."
And before you say district executive committee
"If the District Executive Committee where the student now lives finds at any time that the change was made for athletic purposes, it shall declare that student ineligible to participate in athletic contests for one year. This may include a student who did not compete at the previous school. If the committee decides that the period of ineligibility should be longer than one year, the committee shall transfer the case to the State Executive Committee.
Subject to Section 403 (f) and 463 (2)(A), a student who has established varsity eligibility under this section at a member school but who subsequently enrolls in another member school and is found to have changed schools for athletic purposes remains eligible at the school, where eligibility was first established."
Honest question - How is this situation different than what happened at San Marcos High School?
-
Looks like Sterling is locked into 2nd place now. I think it is very unlikely that Lee, PNG, or GCM beat them and I doubt Sterling will beat BH.
-
KP’s oline is grinding GCM into dust so far.
-
2 hours ago, Separation Scientist said:
Sterling is the best of those three teams. They should end up 2nd.
With the eye test, yes, they should be the best. For whatever reason though, Sterling hasn't performed very well this year. Not sure if it is just disappointing play or coaching, but something is off there. If Crosby is able to pull of the win against Sterling then 2nd through 4th will be a toss up.
-
1 hour ago, SetHaGoEagles! said:
As of 10/5.
17-5a District Overall Teams Wins Losses Wins Losses Barbers Hill 8 0 33 5 Sterling 6 2 21 6 Nederland 5 3 23 12 Crosby 5 3 17 20 GCM 3 5 14 16 PNG 3 5 12 18 Lee 2 6 6 20 Port Arthur Memorial 0 8 3 12 Scores 10/4.
BH wins 3-0 vs Crosby. (25-11, 25-11, 25-10)
Sterling wins 3-2 vs Nederland. (25-13, 25-19, 22-25, 14-25, 17-15)
Lee wins 3-1 @ PAM. (25-20, 25-15, 20-25, 25-23)
GCM wins 3-2 vs PNG. (19-25, 9-25, 25-16, 25-19, 15-9)
Schedule 10/7.
Barbers Hill @ Lee
Sterling @ Crosby
PNG @ Nederland
PAM @ GCM
Backbreaking loss for Nederland. They will need some help now to have a chance to come in second in this district.
-
23 hours ago, Pkvalt said:
2nd-4th will be determined by next Friday. Hopefully we can hold it together this go around. I don’t want Manvel or Friendswood.
Manvel or Friendswood would be a tall order for the 3rd and 4th place teams. The 2nd place team in this district should be the favorite over Santa Fe, La Porte, or GBall.
Has Been Sports Area Power Rankings
in High School Volleyball
Posted
What...you don't want to rehash Nederland's VB "Miracle on Ice"?