Without beetching about. Coach K? I want to know about our players and how they look/have looked his and last year.
I've not been able to make matches in a while and would like to catch up on things.

Nazari at 1 is gonna go down as one of the best players we have ever had. She is currently ranked #11 in the nation, and is looking to have a great year.

Morgan Frank at #2 is a solid 2. She will not lose many matches at that spot, shes a solid solid player. Look for a lot of wins at 1 and 2.

Christi Potgeiter, Elze's little sister, is a strong #3-4, and has a lot of potential to be a good player. She is young, of course, but could be a good asset to the team this year if she can get some big wins.

Christi Liles needs to have a good senior year. I think she was a great player as a freshman, playing #2 (I believe), but hasn't lived up to her potential since then.

5 and 6 is where the real problems are at. You have to choose between Stephanie Davidson, Janelle Cuthbertson (who has yet to be fully healthy), Lauren Santacroce, and Sheri Olivier. Steph is up and down, but not a really strong player overall. Janelle has a lot of potential, and has been described as a great player, but with all the injuries, no one really knows. Then she goes out and gets double bageled last week against TCU, so who knows. Lauren is nice to look at, but I don't think you can count on her tennis skills when you need them. Sheri is a mess half the time, and if her game is off, it's WAY OFF. However, if she is on, she can take a top player to 3 sets.

This year is gonna be an interesting year. Should have a lot of wins at 1 and 2, and assuming Christi P. and Janelle play to their expectations, this team COULD surprise some people. Not gonna say they will win a lot of big matches, but tu is WAY down this year too, so that may help us out.

thanks. I'm going to try and make some matches this year.

Doubles?

great recap! thanks.

If I can sum it all up: Lauren is nice to look at.

As for doubles, they don't have a strong team or two like the guys do, nor do they have a girl that is a doubles "specialist". I see the doubles as a crapshoot each match. You never know how they are gonna play.

BFs description is right on. A few of those scholarships at the bottom of the lineup are real head-scratchers.

quote:

---

A few of those scholarships at the bottom of the lineup are real head-scratchers.

---

Title IX tokens.

well hopefully they can make good use of the 3 open slots for next year

We are lumped in a pack with Oklahoma, Nebraska, TT, and tu for a shot at second place this year behind the clear favorite Baylor.

Baylor is interesting this year. Although I think they are a clear favorite, this might be the most suspect they have been in a few years, which I know doesn't mean much as they normally rank in the top 10. At indoors their doubles were absolutely atrocious. But in normal joey-fashion, he has brought in some foreigners that can hold their own in singles. But I think this team is more beatable than in the past, unfortunately it probably wont happen in the conference play.

quote:

---

Title IX tokens.

---

Sure, but as long as we have them, why don't we use them well?

I agree about Baylor being weaker but unfortunately they are not weak enough for us to have a shot at them. I think Nebraska and OU are much improved...would not be surprised to see us finish 5th.

Being weal at the bottom of the lineup is a head scratcher. You would think that we could at least sign some real "gamers" to hold down the 4,5 and 6 spot. Instead, we are pretty strong at 1 and 2 (Nazari and Morgan), decent at 3 and 4 (Christi and Christi) and fall off the Earth at 5 and 6.

[This message has been edited by NumberEinAg (edited 3/6/2011 11:12p).]

Solid 7-0 win over Rice over the weekend. Nothing earth-shattering, but the shutout is good to see.

5 3 setters in singles...glad we pulled them out! Good to see Steph get a solid win at 6

We look a lot better than I thought we were going to be. We should have won the UW match and have looked better than last year in the matches I have watched.

After talking with some people after the match, it appears pretty evident that we would have beaten Washington. Although I haven't been able to make it to a match, it seems like we are starting to come on. Hopefully we can pick up a win against Wake then ride a wave into Austin and get a W.

I don't think this is a bad team if they're more consistent. When they play well, they can upset a lot of people. When they don't, they can get beat by some bad teams.

The question (that is better answered by those with playing/coaching experience than just a fan like me) is which is harder to correct in tennis at this level: a lack of skill and talent, or a lack of consistency?

I'm no expert but I'd rather have talent. I think a good coach can get a talented tennis team to show up on a consistent basis but I think it's tougher to overcome mediocre talent in an individual sport like tennis.

If you're a good coach, you want talent.

Interesting. I would've thought the opposite (though obviously too big of a talent gap can't be overcome). Seems like in such a mental sport, that consistency would be huge. But that's why I asked you guys, thanks for the insight!

Talent+Inconsistency certainly does make the season a little more interesting though, ehh?

I think at the Div 1 level its about recruiting if you're having to teach technique and form than you're in trouble.

Really? In a sport as technical as tennis, I have a hard time believing that every player knows everything they need to know about technique by the time they're 18 years old...

Really...because many players men and women have had major success at 18 or before..

I would rather have talent, as a coach myself.

Stroke production should be second nature by the time you're 16, in my opinion. If not, you have very little chance to be an elite player. College coaches will make minor tweaks to most players during the course of their 4 years, but very rarely will they completely overhaul an entire stroke (although sometimes that is a necessity). Sometimes a change in technique is required to increase consistency, but more often than not, it's a matter of increasing shot tolerance and improving shot selection.