11-12-2023, 06:49 PM
Great analysis Hieronymus. I particularly appreciate the insight on South Carolina, who I knew nothing about.
Stanford Women’s Soccer 2023
Great analysis Hieronymus. I particularly appreciate the insight on South Carolina, who I knew nothing about.
11-17-2023, 06:28 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-17-2023, 06:35 PM by Hieronymus.)
My second overseed bit the dust. Brown just lost to Miss St 2-1; so if we win in the next game it will be Miss St for round 3.
Stanford up in 30 min. I don’t like the rain - bad weather rarely helps the better team.
Barring flukes, I think the key today is pretty simple. If we can shut down their right side, we should be fine today.
Stanford up in 30 min. I don’t like the rain - bad weather rarely helps the better team.
Barring flukes, I think the key today is pretty simple. If we can shut down their right side, we should be fine today.
(This post was last modified: 11-17-2023, 06:35 PM by Hieronymus.)
My second overseed bit the dust. Brown just lost to Miss St 2-1; so if we win in the next game it will be Miss St for round 3.
Stanford up in 30 min. I don’t like the rain - bad weather rarely helps the better team.
Barring flukes, I think the key today is pretty simple. If we can shut down their right side, we should be fine today.
Stanford up in 30 min. I don’t like the rain - bad weather rarely helps the better team.
Barring flukes, I think the key today is pretty simple. If we can shut down their right side, we should be fine today.
11-17-2023, 08:45 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-17-2023, 08:50 PM by Hieronymus.)
Hieronymus dateline='[url=tel:1700270939' Wrote: 1700270939[/url]']
My second overseed bit the dust. Brown just lost to Miss St 2-1; so if we win in the next game it will be Miss St for round 3.
Stanford up in 30 min. I don’t like the rain - bad weather rarely helps the better team.
Barring flukes, I think the key today is pretty simple. If we can shut down their right side, we should be fine today.
3:0 Stanford with 24 minutes left. It hasn’t been scintillating - not a surprise considering the weather. But it has been dominant. The other USC has barely sniffed the goal.
On a side note, the main camera person might be drunk. I feel like I am watching a high school football game with a freshman AV kid runnng the camera. Who snuck in a bottle of schnapps.
(This post was last modified: 11-17-2023, 08:50 PM by Hieronymus.)
Hieronymus dateline='[url=tel:1700270939' Wrote: 1700270939[/url]']
My second overseed bit the dust. Brown just lost to Miss St 2-1; so if we win in the next game it will be Miss St for round 3.
Stanford up in 30 min. I don’t like the rain - bad weather rarely helps the better team.
Barring flukes, I think the key today is pretty simple. If we can shut down their right side, we should be fine today.
3:0 Stanford with 24 minutes left. It hasn’t been scintillating - not a surprise considering the weather. But it has been dominant. The other USC has barely sniffed the goal.
On a side note, the main camera person might be drunk. I feel like I am watching a high school football game with a freshman AV kid runnng the camera. Who snuck in a bottle of schnapps.
11-18-2023, 11:42 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-18-2023, 12:17 PM by Hieronymus.)
Well I hope somebody is reading…
Anyway, it finished 3:0 Stanford. It was a comprehensive and complete performance. 23 shots to 3, none of which were on goal or even vaguely threatening. The other USC was lucky to even cross midfield in the second half. Needless to say my potential concern on their right never materialized. Kitahata and Brandt had no issues. Basically, we were better at every position on the field.
Standard 433 yesterday. A little right side dominant which makes sense with USCs strengths. Once Kitahata scored midway in the first half, this was over. The wet conditions didn’t seem to hinder us too much, though it did cause a few more turnovers then normal.
Random thoughts
- i would like to see more crosses miss short vs. long. See the second goal as to why
- need to work on throw ins a bit - we turn it over too often
- Bhuta is getting more comfortable at RB
- I said JMU v USC was slooooow - well more of that then I realized was USC. They never did anything to shake this game up. Be more direct, pressure more, commit a few more fouls. They had 4 fouls all game. Anything. They just sat back and let Stanford control them all game. I know they were outclassed, but do something.
- The first goal was a great Aikey cross with a nice finish
- very pretty build on the third goal though the GK seemed slow to react
Anyway, on to Miss St. Quick notes.
- Brown was significantly bigger, stronger and mostly faster. I was impressed that Miss St was skilled and composed enough to neutralize Brown’s advantages. That isn’t so common at this level.
- it was not a fluke. Miss St was better.
- nobody specifically stood out for me, but their midfield was very composed which lines up with the all SeC awards. Hodge for them was first team SEC
- the goalie was 2nd team SEC.
- Again we should be the much better team. Stanford will be more athletic and more skilled.
On to Sunday
Anyway, it finished 3:0 Stanford. It was a comprehensive and complete performance. 23 shots to 3, none of which were on goal or even vaguely threatening. The other USC was lucky to even cross midfield in the second half. Needless to say my potential concern on their right never materialized. Kitahata and Brandt had no issues. Basically, we were better at every position on the field.
Standard 433 yesterday. A little right side dominant which makes sense with USCs strengths. Once Kitahata scored midway in the first half, this was over. The wet conditions didn’t seem to hinder us too much, though it did cause a few more turnovers then normal.
Random thoughts
- i would like to see more crosses miss short vs. long. See the second goal as to why
- need to work on throw ins a bit - we turn it over too often
- Bhuta is getting more comfortable at RB
- I said JMU v USC was slooooow - well more of that then I realized was USC. They never did anything to shake this game up. Be more direct, pressure more, commit a few more fouls. They had 4 fouls all game. Anything. They just sat back and let Stanford control them all game. I know they were outclassed, but do something.
- The first goal was a great Aikey cross with a nice finish
- very pretty build on the third goal though the GK seemed slow to react
Anyway, on to Miss St. Quick notes.
- Brown was significantly bigger, stronger and mostly faster. I was impressed that Miss St was skilled and composed enough to neutralize Brown’s advantages. That isn’t so common at this level.
- it was not a fluke. Miss St was better.
- nobody specifically stood out for me, but their midfield was very composed which lines up with the all SeC awards. Hodge for them was first team SEC
- the goalie was 2nd team SEC.
- Again we should be the much better team. Stanford will be more athletic and more skilled.
On to Sunday
(This post was last modified: 11-18-2023, 12:17 PM by Hieronymus.)
Well I hope somebody is reading…
Anyway, it finished 3:0 Stanford. It was a comprehensive and complete performance. 23 shots to 3, none of which were on goal or even vaguely threatening. The other USC was lucky to even cross midfield in the second half. Needless to say my potential concern on their right never materialized. Kitahata and Brandt had no issues. Basically, we were better at every position on the field.
Standard 433 yesterday. A little right side dominant which makes sense with USCs strengths. Once Kitahata scored midway in the first half, this was over. The wet conditions didn’t seem to hinder us too much, though it did cause a few more turnovers then normal.
Random thoughts
- i would like to see more crosses miss short vs. long. See the second goal as to why
- need to work on throw ins a bit - we turn it over too often
- Bhuta is getting more comfortable at RB
- I said JMU v USC was slooooow - well more of that then I realized was USC. They never did anything to shake this game up. Be more direct, pressure more, commit a few more fouls. They had 4 fouls all game. Anything. They just sat back and let Stanford control them all game. I know they were outclassed, but do something.
- The first goal was a great Aikey cross with a nice finish
- very pretty build on the third goal though the GK seemed slow to react
Anyway, on to Miss St. Quick notes.
- Brown was significantly bigger, stronger and mostly faster. I was impressed that Miss St was skilled and composed enough to neutralize Brown’s advantages. That isn’t so common at this level.
- it was not a fluke. Miss St was better.
- nobody specifically stood out for me, but their midfield was very composed which lines up with the all SeC awards. Hodge for them was first team SEC
- the goalie was 2nd team SEC.
- Again we should be the much better team. Stanford will be more athletic and more skilled.
On to Sunday
Anyway, it finished 3:0 Stanford. It was a comprehensive and complete performance. 23 shots to 3, none of which were on goal or even vaguely threatening. The other USC was lucky to even cross midfield in the second half. Needless to say my potential concern on their right never materialized. Kitahata and Brandt had no issues. Basically, we were better at every position on the field.
Standard 433 yesterday. A little right side dominant which makes sense with USCs strengths. Once Kitahata scored midway in the first half, this was over. The wet conditions didn’t seem to hinder us too much, though it did cause a few more turnovers then normal.
Random thoughts
- i would like to see more crosses miss short vs. long. See the second goal as to why
- need to work on throw ins a bit - we turn it over too often
- Bhuta is getting more comfortable at RB
- I said JMU v USC was slooooow - well more of that then I realized was USC. They never did anything to shake this game up. Be more direct, pressure more, commit a few more fouls. They had 4 fouls all game. Anything. They just sat back and let Stanford control them all game. I know they were outclassed, but do something.
- The first goal was a great Aikey cross with a nice finish
- very pretty build on the third goal though the GK seemed slow to react
Anyway, on to Miss St. Quick notes.
- Brown was significantly bigger, stronger and mostly faster. I was impressed that Miss St was skilled and composed enough to neutralize Brown’s advantages. That isn’t so common at this level.
- it was not a fluke. Miss St was better.
- nobody specifically stood out for me, but their midfield was very composed which lines up with the all SeC awards. Hodge for them was first team SEC
- the goalie was 2nd team SEC.
- Again we should be the much better team. Stanford will be more athletic and more skilled.
On to Sunday
11-18-2023, 12:08 PM
Thanks for the report. I’m going to always be a newbie at following soccer and couldn’t watch last night’s game
11-18-2023, 12:39 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-19-2023, 11:59 AM by OCcardinal.)
I love that we got in so many subs in. 21 different players played (18 of whom played more than 20 minutes). Great that our starters got that rest with the short turnaround (and risk of injury on the slippery field).
I think Irvine has a good chance against Nebraska, who won because unseeded Tennessee's GK slipped making a kick. If we take care of business on Sunday it'll be a rematch from earlier this year for a trip to the College Cup. That Irvine game was tough, but we are also finishing much better now and everyone's settled into their positions.
Also of note, our 6-goal scoring margin thus far is tied for 2nd among teams that have made the 3rd round.
1) #2 Seed Penn State 9 (7 of their goals were scored in their shutout vs Massey #188 Central Ct. St. in round 1)
2T) #2 Seed Stanford 6 (we have played Massey #35 Pepperdine and Massey #29 South Carolina)
2T) #1 Seed Florida State 6 (5 of their goals were scored in their shutout vs Massey #221 Morehead St. in round 1)
I wouldn't want to play against Stanford right now. Go Cardinal!
North Carolina, as a 3 seed, is still alive and well in BYU's bracket and has outscored its opponents 4-1. I wouldn't be surprised if the College Cup ended up with those 4 bluebloods (Penn State, Stanford, Florida State and North Carolina).
I think Irvine has a good chance against Nebraska, who won because unseeded Tennessee's GK slipped making a kick. If we take care of business on Sunday it'll be a rematch from earlier this year for a trip to the College Cup. That Irvine game was tough, but we are also finishing much better now and everyone's settled into their positions.
Also of note, our 6-goal scoring margin thus far is tied for 2nd among teams that have made the 3rd round.
1) #2 Seed Penn State 9 (7 of their goals were scored in their shutout vs Massey #188 Central Ct. St. in round 1)
2T) #2 Seed Stanford 6 (we have played Massey #35 Pepperdine and Massey #29 South Carolina)
2T) #1 Seed Florida State 6 (5 of their goals were scored in their shutout vs Massey #221 Morehead St. in round 1)
I wouldn't want to play against Stanford right now. Go Cardinal!
North Carolina, as a 3 seed, is still alive and well in BYU's bracket and has outscored its opponents 4-1. I wouldn't be surprised if the College Cup ended up with those 4 bluebloods (Penn State, Stanford, Florida State and North Carolina).
(This post was last modified: 11-19-2023, 11:59 AM by OCcardinal.)
I love that we got in so many subs in. 21 different players played (18 of whom played more than 20 minutes). Great that our starters got that rest with the short turnaround (and risk of injury on the slippery field).
I think Irvine has a good chance against Nebraska, who won because unseeded Tennessee's GK slipped making a kick. If we take care of business on Sunday it'll be a rematch from earlier this year for a trip to the College Cup. That Irvine game was tough, but we are also finishing much better now and everyone's settled into their positions.
Also of note, our 6-goal scoring margin thus far is tied for 2nd among teams that have made the 3rd round.
1) #2 Seed Penn State 9 (7 of their goals were scored in their shutout vs Massey #188 Central Ct. St. in round 1)
2T) #2 Seed Stanford 6 (we have played Massey #35 Pepperdine and Massey #29 South Carolina)
2T) #1 Seed Florida State 6 (5 of their goals were scored in their shutout vs Massey #221 Morehead St. in round 1)
I wouldn't want to play against Stanford right now. Go Cardinal!
North Carolina, as a 3 seed, is still alive and well in BYU's bracket and has outscored its opponents 4-1. I wouldn't be surprised if the College Cup ended up with those 4 bluebloods (Penn State, Stanford, Florida State and North Carolina).
I think Irvine has a good chance against Nebraska, who won because unseeded Tennessee's GK slipped making a kick. If we take care of business on Sunday it'll be a rematch from earlier this year for a trip to the College Cup. That Irvine game was tough, but we are also finishing much better now and everyone's settled into their positions.
Also of note, our 6-goal scoring margin thus far is tied for 2nd among teams that have made the 3rd round.
1) #2 Seed Penn State 9 (7 of their goals were scored in their shutout vs Massey #188 Central Ct. St. in round 1)
2T) #2 Seed Stanford 6 (we have played Massey #35 Pepperdine and Massey #29 South Carolina)
2T) #1 Seed Florida State 6 (5 of their goals were scored in their shutout vs Massey #221 Morehead St. in round 1)
I wouldn't want to play against Stanford right now. Go Cardinal!
North Carolina, as a 3 seed, is still alive and well in BYU's bracket and has outscored its opponents 4-1. I wouldn't be surprised if the College Cup ended up with those 4 bluebloods (Penn State, Stanford, Florida State and North Carolina).
11-18-2023, 01:05 PM
Thank you for the summary! I appreciate hearing from someone more knowledgeable than myself. Nevertheless, my excitement about this team is growing!
11-18-2023, 02:18 PM
(11-18-2023, 11:42 AM)Hieronymus Wrote: we should be the much better team. Stanford will be more athletic and more skilled.Mississippi State's best win was against over-seeded 3-seed Brown. They also beat 5-seed Iowa, and 6-seed Alabama twice, 2-0 and later on PKs in the SEC tournament. In the SEC tournament they then lost to NCAA 1-seed Arkansas 2-0. So they're not bad, probably better than South Carolina. We're certainly better, but we gotta show it on the field--which I hope will have dried out a lot by tomorrow!
(11-18-2023, 11:42 AM)Hieronymus Wrote: we should be the much better team. Stanford will be more athletic and more skilled.Mississippi State's best win was against over-seeded 3-seed Brown. They also beat 5-seed Iowa, and 6-seed Alabama twice, 2-0 and later on PKs in the SEC tournament. In the SEC tournament they then lost to NCAA 1-seed Arkansas 2-0. So they're not bad, probably better than South Carolina. We're certainly better, but we gotta show it on the field--which I hope will have dried out a lot by tomorrow!
11-18-2023, 08:54 PM
oldalum dateline='[url=tel:1700342285' Wrote: 1700342285[/url]']
Hieronymus dateline='[url=tel:1700332921' Wrote: 1700332921[/url]']Mississippi State's best win was against over-seeded 3-seed Brown. They also beat 5-seed Iowa, and 6-seed Alabama twice, 2-0 and later on PKs in the SEC tournament. In the SEC tournament they then lost to NCAA 1-seed Arkansas 2-0. So they're not bad, probably better than South Carolina. We're certainly better, but we gotta show it on the field--which I hope will have dried out a lot by tomorrow!
we should be the much better team. Stanford will be more athletic and more skilled.
Fair. My eyes say about the same, but that is based on only one and two games respectively. Miss St looks a bit better balanced to me but with less star personality. Massey had them about the same going in with SC a few spots higher.
oldalum dateline='[url=tel:1700342285' Wrote: 1700342285[/url]']
Hieronymus dateline='[url=tel:1700332921' Wrote: 1700332921[/url]']Mississippi State's best win was against over-seeded 3-seed Brown. They also beat 5-seed Iowa, and 6-seed Alabama twice, 2-0 and later on PKs in the SEC tournament. In the SEC tournament they then lost to NCAA 1-seed Arkansas 2-0. So they're not bad, probably better than South Carolina. We're certainly better, but we gotta show it on the field--which I hope will have dried out a lot by tomorrow!
we should be the much better team. Stanford will be more athletic and more skilled.
Fair. My eyes say about the same, but that is based on only one and two games respectively. Miss St looks a bit better balanced to me but with less star personality. Massey had them about the same going in with SC a few spots higher.
11-19-2023, 04:07 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-19-2023, 05:07 PM by Spiny_Norman.)
Stanford wins 1-0 on a goal in the 11th minute by Elise Evans. She headed in a shot after the Mississippi St keeper had saved a great header by Maya Doms off a corner kick. Video below.
https://x.com/StanfordWSoccer/status/172...20247?s=20
Stanford will host Nebraska in the Elite Eight on Friday at 2 pm. Nebraska ended Irvine's Cinderella run, 4-0.
https://x.com/StanfordWSoccer/status/172...20247?s=20
Stanford will host Nebraska in the Elite Eight on Friday at 2 pm. Nebraska ended Irvine's Cinderella run, 4-0.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
(This post was last modified: 11-19-2023, 05:07 PM by Spiny_Norman.)
Stanford wins 1-0 on a goal in the 11th minute by Elise Evans. She headed in a shot after the Mississippi St keeper had saved a great header by Maya Doms off a corner kick. Video below.
https://x.com/StanfordWSoccer/status/172...20247?s=20
Stanford will host Nebraska in the Elite Eight on Friday at 2 pm. Nebraska ended Irvine's Cinderella run, 4-0.
https://x.com/StanfordWSoccer/status/172...20247?s=20
Stanford will host Nebraska in the Elite Eight on Friday at 2 pm. Nebraska ended Irvine's Cinderella run, 4-0.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
FSU blowing out Texas 4-0. Good result for the Director's Cup standings!
11-20-2023, 11:33 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-20-2023, 01:10 PM by Hieronymus.)
Solid game yesterday. Stanford came out in the standard 433 line up. The first 31 minutes looked like a repeat of the SC game - Stanford was able to pass the ball around at will. I will give miss St credit though, at that point they did what SC didn’t. They upped the intensity and tried to make a game out of it. They still weren’t that threatening - 7 shots, 3 on goal - but I only had 3-4 times they were legitimately dangerous. It would have been nice to get 2 or 3, but any win that doesn’t go to PKs is a job well done at this point.
Random thoughts
- Jung’s shooting needs to be better. A soft pass to the goalie isn’t a shot.
- Wesley and Evans don’t make many mistakes
- finishing was just a bit off
- Bhuta had some nice ranged strikes that were just off goal
- Doms and Brandt each had a few bad turnovers
- I usually bitch about lax refereeing, but this guy thought he was doing a U-8 game. Heavy breathing was a foul and it was hard to defend properly as a result.
- Lots of sub minutes this game which kinda makes sense with 2 days rest. But the subs didn’t do much with that time.
Bring on Nebraska!
Random thoughts
- Jung’s shooting needs to be better. A soft pass to the goalie isn’t a shot.
- Wesley and Evans don’t make many mistakes
- finishing was just a bit off
- Bhuta had some nice ranged strikes that were just off goal
- Doms and Brandt each had a few bad turnovers
- I usually bitch about lax refereeing, but this guy thought he was doing a U-8 game. Heavy breathing was a foul and it was hard to defend properly as a result.
- Lots of sub minutes this game which kinda makes sense with 2 days rest. But the subs didn’t do much with that time.
Bring on Nebraska!
(This post was last modified: 11-20-2023, 01:10 PM by Hieronymus.)
Solid game yesterday. Stanford came out in the standard 433 line up. The first 31 minutes looked like a repeat of the SC game - Stanford was able to pass the ball around at will. I will give miss St credit though, at that point they did what SC didn’t. They upped the intensity and tried to make a game out of it. They still weren’t that threatening - 7 shots, 3 on goal - but I only had 3-4 times they were legitimately dangerous. It would have been nice to get 2 or 3, but any win that doesn’t go to PKs is a job well done at this point.
Random thoughts
- Jung’s shooting needs to be better. A soft pass to the goalie isn’t a shot.
- Wesley and Evans don’t make many mistakes
- finishing was just a bit off
- Bhuta had some nice ranged strikes that were just off goal
- Doms and Brandt each had a few bad turnovers
- I usually bitch about lax refereeing, but this guy thought he was doing a U-8 game. Heavy breathing was a foul and it was hard to defend properly as a result.
- Lots of sub minutes this game which kinda makes sense with 2 days rest. But the subs didn’t do much with that time.
Bring on Nebraska!
Random thoughts
- Jung’s shooting needs to be better. A soft pass to the goalie isn’t a shot.
- Wesley and Evans don’t make many mistakes
- finishing was just a bit off
- Bhuta had some nice ranged strikes that were just off goal
- Doms and Brandt each had a few bad turnovers
- I usually bitch about lax refereeing, but this guy thought he was doing a U-8 game. Heavy breathing was a foul and it was hard to defend properly as a result.
- Lots of sub minutes this game which kinda makes sense with 2 days rest. But the subs didn’t do much with that time.
Bring on Nebraska!
11-20-2023, 03:08 PM
Aikey seemed less energetic in the first half and was subbed out much earlier than usual (at about 26 minutes IIRC). As she came out she said to Ratcliffe "I'm good, I'm good" so I think she was feeling under the weather. I think she played the entire second half though, and she seemed back to normal energy level.
Shae Harvey also had an off game v. Miss. St. Overall we had more turnovers and missed seeing some of our open players Sunday. A tougher win but a good one.
Shae Harvey also had an off game v. Miss. St. Overall we had more turnovers and missed seeing some of our open players Sunday. A tougher win but a good one.
Aikey seemed less energetic in the first half and was subbed out much earlier than usual (at about 26 minutes IIRC). As she came out she said to Ratcliffe "I'm good, I'm good" so I think she was feeling under the weather. I think she played the entire second half though, and she seemed back to normal energy level.
Shae Harvey also had an off game v. Miss. St. Overall we had more turnovers and missed seeing some of our open players Sunday. A tougher win but a good one.
Shae Harvey also had an off game v. Miss. St. Overall we had more turnovers and missed seeing some of our open players Sunday. A tougher win but a good one.
11-20-2023, 11:00 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-20-2023, 11:02 PM by Hieronymus.)
I watched the first half of Irvine v Nebraska and couldn’t take a second. Irvine was just terrible in the game and it was 3-0 at halftime. It finished 4-0. First goal, opposing players slide tackled each other, the ball squirted out towards Irvine’s goal where a CB whiffed. Ball goes right to a Nebraska forward - goal. Second was a nice cross but an Irvine defender let herself get pinned on the wrong side of the forward - goal. Third goal the goalie fanned on a corner. Irvine was just really bad.
Thoughts
- dale #9 is dangerous at forward
- the Nebraska CBs got really lost a couple of times in the first half but the Irvine CF made a mess of both chances
- it is very unlikely Nebraska plays any low pressure. At all. Looked like full on pedal to the floor all half. I don’t expect this game to be easy.
- Nebraska isn’t particularly tall but they had a lot of broad players. Physicality could be an issue.
- tight reffing will help us
The really big unknown for me is how spread out this game was, and how does it translate against us. The biggest difference college vs pro/international play is spacing. Top tier games you might see all 20 field players no more than 20-30 yards apart vertically. College is often much more spread out vertically. This game was insanely spread out. You often had players scattered across 80-90 yards vertically with huuuge spaces especially between the forwards and midfield. Do we force them back enough those spaces mostly close? Does Harvey get in trouble in wide spaces with her lack of quickness? Do we blow through midfield because Nebraska is pulled too far apart? I have no clue how this plays out.
Nebraska will be the best team we have played so far, and again I expect no lack of intensity this game. We are better, but this could be a real street fight.
Thoughts
- dale #9 is dangerous at forward
- the Nebraska CBs got really lost a couple of times in the first half but the Irvine CF made a mess of both chances
- it is very unlikely Nebraska plays any low pressure. At all. Looked like full on pedal to the floor all half. I don’t expect this game to be easy.
- Nebraska isn’t particularly tall but they had a lot of broad players. Physicality could be an issue.
- tight reffing will help us
The really big unknown for me is how spread out this game was, and how does it translate against us. The biggest difference college vs pro/international play is spacing. Top tier games you might see all 20 field players no more than 20-30 yards apart vertically. College is often much more spread out vertically. This game was insanely spread out. You often had players scattered across 80-90 yards vertically with huuuge spaces especially between the forwards and midfield. Do we force them back enough those spaces mostly close? Does Harvey get in trouble in wide spaces with her lack of quickness? Do we blow through midfield because Nebraska is pulled too far apart? I have no clue how this plays out.
Nebraska will be the best team we have played so far, and again I expect no lack of intensity this game. We are better, but this could be a real street fight.
(This post was last modified: 11-20-2023, 11:02 PM by Hieronymus.)
I watched the first half of Irvine v Nebraska and couldn’t take a second. Irvine was just terrible in the game and it was 3-0 at halftime. It finished 4-0. First goal, opposing players slide tackled each other, the ball squirted out towards Irvine’s goal where a CB whiffed. Ball goes right to a Nebraska forward - goal. Second was a nice cross but an Irvine defender let herself get pinned on the wrong side of the forward - goal. Third goal the goalie fanned on a corner. Irvine was just really bad.
Thoughts
- dale #9 is dangerous at forward
- the Nebraska CBs got really lost a couple of times in the first half but the Irvine CF made a mess of both chances
- it is very unlikely Nebraska plays any low pressure. At all. Looked like full on pedal to the floor all half. I don’t expect this game to be easy.
- Nebraska isn’t particularly tall but they had a lot of broad players. Physicality could be an issue.
- tight reffing will help us
The really big unknown for me is how spread out this game was, and how does it translate against us. The biggest difference college vs pro/international play is spacing. Top tier games you might see all 20 field players no more than 20-30 yards apart vertically. College is often much more spread out vertically. This game was insanely spread out. You often had players scattered across 80-90 yards vertically with huuuge spaces especially between the forwards and midfield. Do we force them back enough those spaces mostly close? Does Harvey get in trouble in wide spaces with her lack of quickness? Do we blow through midfield because Nebraska is pulled too far apart? I have no clue how this plays out.
Nebraska will be the best team we have played so far, and again I expect no lack of intensity this game. We are better, but this could be a real street fight.
Thoughts
- dale #9 is dangerous at forward
- the Nebraska CBs got really lost a couple of times in the first half but the Irvine CF made a mess of both chances
- it is very unlikely Nebraska plays any low pressure. At all. Looked like full on pedal to the floor all half. I don’t expect this game to be easy.
- Nebraska isn’t particularly tall but they had a lot of broad players. Physicality could be an issue.
- tight reffing will help us
The really big unknown for me is how spread out this game was, and how does it translate against us. The biggest difference college vs pro/international play is spacing. Top tier games you might see all 20 field players no more than 20-30 yards apart vertically. College is often much more spread out vertically. This game was insanely spread out. You often had players scattered across 80-90 yards vertically with huuuge spaces especially between the forwards and midfield. Do we force them back enough those spaces mostly close? Does Harvey get in trouble in wide spaces with her lack of quickness? Do we blow through midfield because Nebraska is pulled too far apart? I have no clue how this plays out.
Nebraska will be the best team we have played so far, and again I expect no lack of intensity this game. We are better, but this could be a real street fight.
11-21-2023, 02:03 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-22-2023, 07:35 PM by OCcardinal.)
(11-20-2023, 11:00 PM)Hieronymus Wrote: Nebraska will be the best team we have played so far, and again I expect no lack of intensity this game. We are better, but this could be a real street fight.I agree with this statement but the teams had different strengths and weaknesses. Per Massey the Offense/Defense rankings of the teams we've played so far are:
Pepperdine 20/37 (3-0 Stanford win, 8 shots allowed, 4 on goal)
South Carolina 29/11 (3-0 Stanford win, 3 shots allowed, 0 on goal)
Mississippi State 77/15 (1-0 Stanford win, 7 shots allowed 2 on goal)
And Nebraska's offense/defense rankings are 6/54. They allowed 3 goals in their first two games and even though they held Irvine scoreless they allowed 11 shots, 8 on goal.
So yeah, Nebraska is a much better offense than the first 3 teams (that #9,, Eleanor Dale is #1 in the NCAA tournament so far in xG + xA). But I like the fact that the defense is weaker (on paper at least). We have the #2 defense and #12 offense. We were going to face a good team in the Elite 8 no matter what. Given the strength of our defense relative to our offense I'd rather face Nebraska than any other team that is still in the tournament. So I'm going to guess a 2-1 win for Stanford.
Also, I know pressing teams have caused us problems in the past, but I think we've got the right combination of players to deal with that this season.
(This post was last modified: 11-22-2023, 07:35 PM by OCcardinal.)
(11-20-2023, 11:00 PM)Hieronymus Wrote: Nebraska will be the best team we have played so far, and again I expect no lack of intensity this game. We are better, but this could be a real street fight.I agree with this statement but the teams had different strengths and weaknesses. Per Massey the Offense/Defense rankings of the teams we've played so far are:
Pepperdine 20/37 (3-0 Stanford win, 8 shots allowed, 4 on goal)
South Carolina 29/11 (3-0 Stanford win, 3 shots allowed, 0 on goal)
Mississippi State 77/15 (1-0 Stanford win, 7 shots allowed 2 on goal)
And Nebraska's offense/defense rankings are 6/54. They allowed 3 goals in their first two games and even though they held Irvine scoreless they allowed 11 shots, 8 on goal.
So yeah, Nebraska is a much better offense than the first 3 teams (that #9,, Eleanor Dale is #1 in the NCAA tournament so far in xG + xA). But I like the fact that the defense is weaker (on paper at least). We have the #2 defense and #12 offense. We were going to face a good team in the Elite 8 no matter what. Given the strength of our defense relative to our offense I'd rather face Nebraska than any other team that is still in the tournament. So I'm going to guess a 2-1 win for Stanford.
Also, I know pressing teams have caused us problems in the past, but I think we've got the right combination of players to deal with that this season.
(11-21-2023, 02:03 PM)OCcardinal Wrote: #9,, Eleanor Dale is #1 in the NCAA tournament so far in xG + xA).Not just in the tournament; according to Nebraska: She leads the country in total goals (28), goals per game (1.22) and shots per game (6.00). Dale now ranks third in Big Ten history in single-season goals (28) and sixth in single-season points (61). Dale is just the fourth player in Big Ten history to total 60 points in a season.
I'm guessing our defenders are aware of her. :)
(11-21-2023, 02:03 PM)OCcardinal Wrote: #9,, Eleanor Dale is #1 in the NCAA tournament so far in xG + xA).Not just in the tournament; according to Nebraska: She leads the country in total goals (28), goals per game (1.22) and shots per game (6.00). Dale now ranks third in Big Ten history in single-season goals (28) and sixth in single-season points (61). Dale is just the fourth player in Big Ten history to total 60 points in a season.
I'm guessing our defenders are aware of her. :)
11-22-2023, 12:06 PM
Game vs. Nebraska is sold out. I'm looking for a couple of tickets. Let me know if you have any extra. Thanks.
11-24-2023, 03:18 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-24-2023, 04:05 PM by OCcardinal.)
(11-20-2023, 11:33 AM)Hieronymus Wrote: - Jung’s shooting needs to be better. A soft pass to the goalie isn’t a shot.She heard you. 1-0 Stanford! Still early in the 1st. Go Cardinal, keep the pressure on!
_______
Jung's goal is the difference in the half. Still 1-0 Stanford. Stanford with 9 shots, 4 on goal. Nebraska with 4 shots, 0 on goal. You can see how quickly Nebraska creates opportunities though. We've had some really good chances. Stanford doing well with possession, but wouldn't mind getting some more of our shots to go in in the 2nd half and building a cushion. If the score remains like this I'm sure Nebraska will really start pushing at some point.
(This post was last modified: 11-24-2023, 04:05 PM by OCcardinal.)
(11-20-2023, 11:33 AM)Hieronymus Wrote: - Jung’s shooting needs to be better. A soft pass to the goalie isn’t a shot.She heard you. 1-0 Stanford! Still early in the 1st. Go Cardinal, keep the pressure on!
_______
Jung's goal is the difference in the half. Still 1-0 Stanford. Stanford with 9 shots, 4 on goal. Nebraska with 4 shots, 0 on goal. You can see how quickly Nebraska creates opportunities though. We've had some really good chances. Stanford doing well with possession, but wouldn't mind getting some more of our shots to go in in the 2nd half and building a cushion. If the score remains like this I'm sure Nebraska will really start pushing at some point.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »