We wouldn't have both of them as L, both will be critical for us. One will be L, one DS. I could see Thedford wearing the L as a backup

Ag4eva95 said:

---

We wouldn't have both of them as L, both will be critical for us. One will be L, one DS. I could see Thedford wearing the L as a backup

---

Was responding to the assumption of a 6-2 with both OH playing 6 rotations. Not much room for a DS if you already have a L, S, and OH in the back row.

I guess you can sit the 2nd best little on the bench for most of the game and only come in situationally. But if they are both L, you could play the offensive and defensive L game if one is stronger at serve receive or whatever.

Obviously a 5-1 or Ring not playing 6 rotations gives you room for a DS and having your best two littles on the court at the same time is a plus.

I enjoyed watching the run, but didn't get to see the whole season so I don't know the answer to my question below.

I hope it's the case she can, does Megan's passing when she was on the floor last year indicate she can be a 6 rotation player?

That's valid! It's a good problem to have. I'm curious to see if Ring can hang with 6 rotations. I can see it being similar to Hellmuth. But Applegate and Rodriguez, in my opinion, can be one of the best "little" rooms in the nation. Morrison will get creative with how they get involved. The exciting thing is, we have many options. Across the board. This is another deeep team, just a little unproven at some interesting positions

How much does addition of Nicholson change your line ups?

D.J. Flores said:

---

How much does addition of Nicholson change your line ups?

---

I'm not sure, but it does give us a real option at running a 6-2 if Morrison wants to go that route. Will be interesting to see what they do.

My gut tells me we will develop into a 5-1 with Musgrove, but I think there will be growing pains with team development. Wouldn't be surprised to see multiple looks throughout the year. This is still a deep team, just not sure where the pieces will fit

Ag4eva95 said:

---

My gut tells me we will develop into a 5-1 with Musgrove, but I think there will be growing pains with team development. Wouldn't be surprised to see multiple looks throughout the year. This is still a deep team, just not sure where the pieces will fit

---

I trust they'll all fit together in December

Any updated predictions for the starting lineup after the spring matches?

I'm curious about the opposite position! Morris or Lacewell… it'll be interesting, no easy opponents to open up the season! Throw them into the fire and see who's ready to step up!

I wish we knew more on who played the most in that last SMU match

Setter: Nicholson most likely but Musgrove will make a push (I just don't see us running a 6-2…too many subs, less time for Applegate, having a different setter impacts consistency, etc.)

OH: Stowers and Ring

Middles: Castle and Sharp

Opposite: Morris and Fitch (she is too good to keep off the court)

Libero: Gabi Rodriguez

DS: Addi Applegate

That leaves a LOT of good players on the bench so it will be fun to see them battle it out.

Setting is where I am most interested…… proven vs unproven. Wonder if Musgrove makes the full transition to a pin hitter with Peterson coming in next year and most likely being a day 1 starter

Ag4eva95 said:

---

Setting is where I am most interested…… proven vs unproven. Wonder if Musgrove makes the full transition to a pin hitter with Peterson coming in next year and most likely being a day 1 starter

---

I also wonder about Musgrove. No clue if she can be a good enough pin to play here but she doesn't have a great path as a setter right now if Peterson is as good as she appears to be. This was really her year and when Nicholson became available and was a late portal addition, that really made things murky for her.

BiochemAg97 said:

---

Ag4eva95 said:

---

I'm gonna take a 6-2 approach here! Ring and Stowers will be 6 rotation players the majority of the time, leaving some availability for subs.

S: Musgrove and Manning
OH: Stowers and Ring
Opp: morris and Lacewell(for some reason I'm really high on her ability to come in and contribute)
Middles: Castle and Sharp
L: Rodriguez, but with how Applegate played I wouldn't count her out to earn the jersey

Fitch will be the first off the bench, but curious if she earns time at opp. If Morris can take a step offensively, then that helps her case. I kind of see her as a project still, with solid potential as a blocking specialist again.

Still see the most likely lineup being a 5-1, but thought I'd take a different approach for potential

---

We can have 2 Ls. So probably both Rodriquez and Applegate as L. Then it becomes a question of how you rotate them. And they don't cost a substitution.

---

We wouldn't want to do that since it would require that we only have one on the court at a time, vs if we use one as a DS we can always have one on the court and half the time have both on the court.

tactical said:

---

BiochemAg97 said:

---

Ag4eva95 said:

---

I'm gonna take a 6-2 approach here! Ring and Stowers will be 6 rotation players the majority of the time, leaving some availability for subs.

S: Musgrove and Manning
OH: Stowers and Ring
Opp: morris and Lacewell(for some reason I'm really high on her ability to come in and contribute)
Middles: Castle and Sharp
L: Rodriguez, but with how Applegate played I wouldn't count her out to earn the jersey

Fitch will be the first off the bench, but curious if she earns time at opp. If Morris can take a step offensively, then that helps her case. I kind of see her as a project still, with solid potential as a blocking specialist again.

Still see the most likely lineup being a 5-1, but thought I'd take a different approach for potential

---

We can have 2 Ls. So probably both Rodriquez and Applegate as L. Then it becomes a question of how you rotate them. And they don't cost a substitution.

---

We wouldn't want to do that since it would require that we only have one on the court at a time, vs if we use one as a DS we can always have one on the court and half the time have both on the court.

---

DS doesn't help in the particular scenario being discussed, specifically a 6-2 with both OH playing 6 rotations. There is not an opportunity for a DS to be regularly on the court in that scenario as you have an L, OH, and S in the back row at all times.

The desire for a L and DS in some rotations could argue against that entire scenario and push more towards a 5-1.

Note: Jamie's first year had 2 DS get meaningful minutes running a 6-2 and having a L, S, and DS on the back row essentially all the time. He specifically said the use of that system was to keep the littles on the court. Looking back, that may have spoken as much to a weakness of our OHs in the back court at the time as to the strength of the DSs.

I don't think Ring will play backcourt, she was DS'ed in the spring most frequently by Applegate or Rodriguez. Her serve receive is not as strong as Stowers, and Fitch could be the backrow attack option by hitting a D-ball attack on the opposite if we need a backrow option.

haydayenthusiast said:

---

I don't think Ring will play backcourt, she was DS'ed in the spring most frequently by Applegate or Rodriguez. Her serve receive is not as strong as Stowers, and Fitch could be the backrow attack option by hitting a D-ball attack on the opposite if we need a backrow option.

---

We will see…I think she will be a 6 rotation player. She was an All-American last year and I've seen plenty of her highlights hitting from the back row. You start using up your subs quickly if you are frequently taking out your OHs when they rotate in the back row. Will be interesting to see what Coach Morrison cooks up.