Semi-Final Match Analysis

By Jim Stone & Shelton Collier

Stanford Box Score Analysis• By Jim Stone

ATTACKSBarboza (1) – 16%

(2) 10%(3) 62%(4) 35%(5) 42%

Akinradewo (1) 0%(2) 40%(3) 30%(4) 71%(5) 75%

Okogbaa 10 attempts –30%

Stanford Box Score Analysis• By Jim Stone

PASS(1) 2.26(2) 2.14(3) 2.29(4) 2.50(5) 2.20

Stanford Box Score Analysis• By Jim Stone

FOR THE MATCH: Okogbaa

Hit –30%

Block – 2 Assist

Score – 2.0 Pts.

Penn State Box Score Analysis• By Shelton Collier

•Penn State Hitting Efficiency for the season .403

•Game 1 and 2 Combined Penn State Hits .400

•Game 3 and 4 combined Penn State Hits .200 (season low .103 game 3)

•Game 3 and 4 Nebraska hits .349 (hit .277 for the season)

Penn State Box Score Analysis• By Shelton Collier

Game 5Penn State 9 – 1 – 25 .320 (passed 2.5)Nebraska 9 – 4 – 28 .179 (passed 1.7)

Key Points in Game 5:Penn State 3 point runPoint 10: Nebraska attack errorPoint 11: Nebraska attack errorPoint 12: Nebraska Aced

Penn State Box Score Analysis• By Shelton Collier

OVERALL: Penn State Sideout Efficiency 65%Nebraska Sideout Efficiency 60%

Ace to Error Ratio: Both teams 3 Aces / 8 Errors

Penn State Box Score Analysis• By Shelton Collier

First Ball Sideout Efficiency

Penn StatePerfect Pass (47) .430“2” pass (17) .060

Nebraska Perfect Pass (20) .350“2” pass (47) .230

Penn State Box Score Analysis• By Shelton Collier

Passing

Penn Stateperfect pass (47) .430“2” pass (17) .060

Nebraska Perfect Pass (20) .350“2” pass (47) .230

Penn State Box Score Analysis• By Shelton Collier

2.5

2.2

1.9

2.2

2.5

1.6

2.0

2.1

2.1

1.7

Game 1

Game 2

Game 3

Game 4

Game 5

How did Nebraska almost Pull it Off!?Right Side Attack: Mostly to Outside Hitters vs. predominantly Hodge

Made Passers Bend and Served Everyone (no target)

Pipe to Right Back

Center Back Defense vs. Fawcett (32 Digs)

Very few tips / Off speed ------ Lots of high hands Larson/Mueller

Stanford Game Plan StrategyBarboza and Klineman

Must hit high/hard off blockNo short tips over blockNo passive roll shots

Must have high efficiency attack in the middle (Akinradewo/Okagbaa)Last year’s championship match / 5 gamesAkinradewo 18 – 1 – 40 .425Girard 10 – 2 – 20 .400

Thursday vs. TexasAkinradewo 17 - 3 – 31 .452Okagbaa 1 – 4 – 10 -.300

Okagbaa first / only kill not until game 4

Great defense, “Nebraska blue collar” work ethic will get Nebraska crowd invested in cheering for/pushing Stanford

Stanford Game Plan Strategy

SERVE, HARD, FLAT WITH PACEThe high “lollipup” short serve has not been effective all year.Low short serve that drops off; much more effective.Trying to serve Hodge as a primary tactic has not been effective all year. (2.3 vs Nebraska)

Nebraska attempted to serve Fawcett. Fawcett passed only 1.8 vs Nebraska. Holehouse and Hodge try to help her taking seams or cutting in front of her. Holehouse 2.4

Stanford Game Plan Strategy

Key factor last year vs. Penn State in Championship match: Stanford 9 aces / 11 errors: aggressive serving

Learn from Nebraska: After down 0-2, Cook says in interview:

“we must serve tougher to win”

Game 3 Penn State passes 1.9 Stanford: start the match with tougher serving.

Conclusion

Semi-Final Match AnalysisBy Jim Stone & Shelton Collier