The CardBoard
WSoc: Pre-season poll - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: WSoc: Pre-season poll (/thread-22148.html)



WSoc: Pre-season poll - BostonCard - 08-11-2021

Stanford picked third, behind the LA schools.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/pac12/status/1425506332057079814?s=20[/tweet]

BC


RE: WSoc: Pre-season poll - BobK - 08-11-2021

Plus 24th in the nation


RE: WSoc: Pre-season poll - Cardinal77 - 08-11-2021

(08-11-2021, 12:55 PM)BobK Wrote:  Plus 24th in the nation

Why are Kuhlmann and Yuasa not listed on the current roster?


RE: WSoc: Pre-season poll - Spiny_Norman - 08-11-2021

(08-11-2021, 01:28 PM)Cardinal77 Wrote:  
(08-11-2021, 12:55 PM)BobK Wrote:  Plus 24th in the nation

Why are Kuhlmann and Yuasa not listed on the current roster?

Kuhlmann posted on Instagram a few days ago. She has medically retired.

"While I’m devastated about facing my second season-ending injury in two years, with this one being college career-ending as well, I also feel extremely grateful to experience joy in the midst of trial (even if it’s very tired joy?). I can do so because I know trial means that God is not done with me yet, and that’s an exciting promise!"

https://www.instagram.com/p/CSPuyeonxoA/


RE: WSoc: Pre-season poll - oldalum - 08-11-2021

What happened? I’m glad her last act in a Stanford uniform was scoring the game winning goal vs. Cal in overtime


RE: WSoc: Pre-season poll - Jamesy - 08-12-2021

(08-11-2021, 02:25 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:  
(08-11-2021, 01:28 PM)Cardinal77 Wrote:  
(08-11-2021, 12:55 PM)BobK Wrote:  Plus 24th in the nation

Why are Kuhlmann and Yuasa not listed on the current roster?

Kuhlmann posted on Instagram a few days ago. She has medically retired.

"While I’m devastated about facing my second season-ending injury in two years, with this one being college career-ending as well, I also feel extremely grateful to experience joy in the midst of trial (even if it’s very tired joy?). I can do so because I know trial means that God is not done with me yet, and that’s an exciting promise!"

https://www.instagram.com/p/CSPuyeonxoA/

I took the post to mean she's out for the season but may try to play post college.


RE: WSoc: Pre-season poll - Mick - 08-13-2021

(08-11-2021, 12:55 PM)BobK Wrote:  Plus 24th in the nation

SCU at #2...

https://www.soccerwire.com/news/ncaa-womens-soccer-preseason-rankings-revealed-for-2021/


RE: WSoc: Pre-season poll - oldalum - 08-13-2021

(08-13-2021, 02:25 PM)Mick Wrote:  SCU at #2...
They're returning 10 of 11 starters from the championship game. Heavily upperclass team.


RE: WSoc: Pre-season poll - Sakibomb25 - 08-13-2021

(08-13-2021, 03:38 PM)oldalum Wrote:  
(08-13-2021, 02:25 PM)Mick Wrote:  SCU at #2...
They're returning 10 of 11 starters from the championship game. Heavily upperclass team.
Our defense should be solid with the return of Girma from injury and Wesley returning... but who is going to score for us? That's the biggest concern.


RE: WSoc: Pre-season poll - Mick - 08-15-2021

(08-13-2021, 04:55 PM)Sakibomb25 Wrote:  
(08-13-2021, 03:38 PM)oldalum Wrote:  
(08-13-2021, 02:25 PM)Mick Wrote:  SCU at #2...
They're returning 10 of 11 starters from the championship game. Heavily upperclass team.
Our defense should be solid with the return of Girma from injury and Wesley returning... but who is going to score for us? That's the biggest concern.

Stanford plays SCU on September 19 at Stanford, 5:00 p.m. game. and will have played Loyola Marymount and University of San Francisco for three consecutive games against Jesuit schools...;)

Stanford also has Duke and North Carolina in the preseason -- in North Carolina.


RE: WSoc: Pre-season poll - oldalum - 08-15-2021

I'm not keen on us playing UNC in the preseason. The last two times we did that resulted in a season-ending injury to one of our best players: first Jaye Boissiere, then Tierna Davidson. The foul on Davidson was particularly egregious and unnecessary.