The CardBoard
Women’s soccer 2025 -- ACC Champs, National runners up - 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: Women’s soccer 2025 -- ACC Champs, National runners up (/thread-25642.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

RE: Women’s soccer 2025 - Jamesy - 08-18-2025

(08-18-2025, 09:06 AM)OCcardinal Wrote:  
(08-17-2025, 03:04 PM)Hieronymus Wrote:  - as OCcardinal noted, it looks like somebody slapped a rocket pack to Montoya this year. Really interesting for a senior to suddenly be so much more athletic on the field. She already has more goals - 2 - vs. the 1 she had all of last year.
It's one thing to look fast against USF, quite another to look fast against Santa Clara.  This is a really encouraging sign for Montoya and the team.

Separately, I'm worried about Bhuta's absence yesterday.  She's on the MAC Hermann watch list.  That's not a player we want out long.  I missed the beginning of the broadcast so I don't know if they said anything.  Nevertheless, I was shocked at how good our midfield looked despite her absence.  Thank goodness we are such a deep team.

I criticized USF for choosing to play five on the back line, but Santa Clara just played five midfielders and we still dominated (28 shots to 2, with our bench players getting big minutes). Are we just unstoppable? I'm really looking forward to the LA trip to find out more.

Bhuta will be missing some time.

RE: Women’s soccer 2025 - Hieronymus - 08-20-2025

(08-18-2025, 01:14 PM)BobK Wrote:  Top Drawer has there rankings out

https://x.com/chrislapuma/status/1957494822732026196?s=46

Stanford # 1

Up to #2 in the NCAA poll, 1 pt behind Duke. I am entertained by the fact that there are only 8 voters in the poll.
h
https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/soccer-women/d1/united-soccer-coaches

RE: Women’s soccer 2025 - OCcardinal - 08-20-2025

(08-18-2025, 10:53 PM)Jamesy Wrote:  Bhuta will be missing some time.
Not a potentially season-ending injury, is it? This may very well be Bhuta's last season at Stanford since she already has her undergrad degree. It'd be a shame if she missed all or most of it. 

It's crazy that college soccer coaches rarely acknowledge that players are out due to injury (vaguely or otherwise).  Imagine if the Stanford football team were a national title contender and our star quarterback just didn't play one day and nothing at all was ever said about it.

(08-18-2025, 08:23 PM)M T Wrote:  We’ll have to see how Stanford holds up to the travel.
The travel schedule is a little better this year because we are away at Cal instead of SMU.  And it's interesting because the team will actually have fewer flights while school is in session than 2023 (pre-ACC).  In 2023, they had to fly to Colorado and Utah and then later to Los Angeles (for the USC and UCLA games). This year they have the one trip to Florida State/Miami.  Longer flights, but 1 trip instead of 2.  And of course the away Florida St. game looms large.

RE: Women’s soccer 2025 - Lorcan - 08-20-2025

Tennessee continues their good start by knocking off #4 UCLA. Now I'm kind of wishing that we play Tennessee. If the live stats are to be believed, Tennessee only managed one shot in the victory - but they made it count as they held on 1-0. 

The LA Trip loses some luster, but UCLA and USC will still be very good tests.

RE: Women’s soccer 2025 - Jamesy - 08-20-2025

(08-20-2025, 03:57 PM)OCcardinal Wrote:  
(08-18-2025, 10:53 PM)Jamesy Wrote:  Bhuta will be missing some time.
Not a potentially season-ending injury, is it? This may very well be Bhuta's last season at Stanford since she already has her undergrad degree. It'd be a shame if she missed all or most of it. 

It's crazy that college soccer coaches rarely acknowledge that players are out due to injury (vaguely or otherwise).  Imagine if the Stanford football team were a national title contender and our star quarterback just didn't play one day and nothing at all was ever said about it.

I don't know how long she'll be out for. Football now has mandatory injury reporting (due to gambling). Until something is mandated, coaches will feel it's a competitive disadvantage to disclose non-season ending injuries.

RE: Women’s soccer 2025 - BostonCard - 08-20-2025

(08-20-2025, 09:40 PM)Jamesy Wrote:  I don't know how long she'll be out for. Football now has mandatory injury reporting (due to gambling). Until something is mandated, coaches will feel it's a competitive disadvantage to disclose non-season ending injuries.

Why should something be mandated?  Why does our curiosity as fans trump the student athlete’s right to privacy?  At least football many of the players are getting paid, and the impact on gambling maybe makes sense (but then again, why is it ok for there to be gambling about collegiate sports, and why should players’ privacy be subservient to the bookies interests?)

Personally, I’m ok not knowing.  Whatever it is, I hope Bhuta recovers soon.

BC

RE: Women’s soccer 2025 - PVTree - 08-21-2025

(08-20-2025, 10:39 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  
(08-20-2025, 09:40 PM)Jamesy Wrote:  I don't know how long she'll be out for. Football now has mandatory injury reporting (due to gambling). Until something is mandated, coaches will feel it's a competitive disadvantage to disclose non-season ending injuries.

Why should something be mandated?  Why does our curiosity as fans trump the student athlete’s right to privacy?  At least football many of the players are getting paid, and the impact on gambling maybe makes sense (but then again, why is it ok for there to be gambling about collegiate sports, and why should players’ privacy be subservient to the bookies interests?)

Personally, I’m ok not knowing.  Whatever it is, I hope Bhuta recovers soon.

BC

I don't need to know the details of the injury. What I'm more interested in is when the athlete is expected to be back if at all..."undisclosed injury that is expected to keep X away from the field/court/track until early October" would do.

RE: Women’s soccer 2025 - Jamesy - 08-21-2025

(08-20-2025, 10:39 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  
(08-20-2025, 09:40 PM)Jamesy Wrote:  I don't know how long she'll be out for. Football now has mandatory injury reporting (due to gambling). Until something is mandated, coaches will feel it's a competitive disadvantage to disclose non-season ending injuries.

Why should something be mandated?  Why does our curiosity as fans trump the student athlete’s right to privacy?  At least football many of the players are getting paid, and the impact on gambling maybe makes sense (but then again, why is it ok for there to be gambling about collegiate sports, and why should players’ privacy be subservient to the bookies interests?)

Personally, I’m ok not knowing.  Whatever it is, I hope Bhuta recovers soon.

BC

I'm not saying it should be mandated or should any injury info be said. Just saying that's why it's disclosed in some sports and not others.

RE: Women’s soccer 2025 - OCcardinal - 08-21-2025

(08-21-2025, 12:44 PM)PVTree Wrote:  I don't need to know the details of the injury. What I'm more interested in is when the athlete is expected to be back if at all..."undisclosed injury that is expected to keep X away from the field/court/track until early October" would do.
I was similarly talking about general comments on player availability, which I didn't think was covered by student/medical privacy laws. All of the Big 4, for example, affirmatively require the disclosure of player availability reports for at least some sports.  Last month the ACC issued an availability mandate for conference football, baseball, and men's and women's basketball games:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOHyGSorZbY  Commissioner Phillips says in the video that the intent, in part, is to safeguard students from harassment by people seeking info.  Though, as Jamesy noted, that concern is related to those who want the info for gambling purposes. I follow Stanford sports closely enough that I care about how individual athletes are doing. But the athletes and coaches certainly don't owe me anything.

RE: Women’s soccer 2025 - Hieronymus - 08-21-2025

3-0 at halftime and yet they are playing remarkably poorly at least in terms of details. Everything is sloppy and shooting has been flat out bad. Kohler had been about the only player I would call sharp today, and she deserved the first goal. Aikey in contrast has been a hot mess. Good game for it though; SDST is completely outmatched. But it should be about 9-0 already.

One new injury - Murdock is out now too. Freer at CB and Sammy at RB as starters. I am thinking Freer at CB against SC was forced not planned now. No injured players returned today.

RE: Women’s soccer 2025 - Hieronymus - 08-21-2025

3:0 18 minutes in and it finishes 3:0 despite the starters playing a lot of minutes in the second half. I am simply going to say it didn’t get less sloppy and the shooting actually got worse. It’s a win. Moving on.

RE: Women’s soccer 2025 - Sakibomb25 - 08-22-2025

What does everyone think about the keepers splitting time? Not gonna lie… not a fan of it. But Ratcliffe did it a few years ago as well. I’d rather have one keeper and stick to it.

RE: Women’s soccer 2025 - M T - 08-22-2025

(08-22-2025, 02:12 PM)Sakibomb25 Wrote:  What does everyone think about the keepers splitting time? Not gonna lie… not a fan of it. But Ratcliffe did it a few years ago as well. I’d rather have one keeper and stick to it.
I'm not knowledgeable about soccer, but my thoughts

RE: Women’s soccer 2025 - Hieronymus - 08-22-2025

(08-22-2025, 03:22 PM)M T Wrote:  
(08-22-2025, 02:12 PM)Sakibomb25 Wrote:  What does everyone think about the keepers splitting time? Not gonna lie… not a fan of it. But Ratcliffe did it a few years ago as well. I’d rather have one keeper and stick to it.
I'm not knowledgeable about soccer, but my thoughts
  • If the coach is not sure about which is better, splitting allows the coach more time to watch each of them under game conditions.
  • If the two are about equal in ability, it keeps both reasonably happy (reducing chance of transfer)
  • Redundancy in the (unlikely) chance of injury, illness, or transfer
  • Motivation for each with each wanting to be better than the other

I doubt we see it much or really at all in a closer game. But the above are all decent reasons to do it in early season blowouts.

It is an interesting contrast though to Freer’s minutes so far. I suppose you can argue Freer is learning a whole new set of positions, but you certainly could argue that it makes sense to give a Frosh goalie as much time as possible to acclimate.

RE: Women’s soccer 2025 - Hieronymus - 08-25-2025

Not as big as the men’s game, but the women beat St. Mary’s 4:1 in the early game Sunday. Nobody returned from injury; so the same starting lineup as the SDST game except the backs and forwards swapped sides. The forwards do that a lot in game, but the backs rarely do so.

Overall, it was a really good first half though things petered out a bit when the subs started to come on. 

In the second, the starters came out massively flat and St. Mary’s cut the lead 2-1 about 6 minutes in. Things got back under control quickly after the goal, and we had the clearest case yet of Montoya flat out running past a defender. 

The big open question right now is defense. It’s mostly untested, but there are some concerning signs:
1.  It’s looked a bit shaky at times. In this game Evans and Boamah simply had players get behind them on the St, Mary’s goal
2. The defenders - mostly Evans honestly - are turning it over too much in bad spots.
3. This attacking CB thing is dangerous. Once in awhile at a carefully chosen moment can be OK, but it’s happening much too frequently. Freer even picked up the disease in the first half, but very noticeably didn’t in the second half. Almost comically so. I suspect the staff had a talk about not doing that anymore.

Arizona is next and then on to LA.

RE: Women’s soccer 2025 - Hieronymus - 08-28-2025

The women crushed Arizona 6:0. The team played well, but Arizona wasn’t that bad. The finishing was just great today - I think it was goals on 3 of the first 4 shots. Arizona had flashes where they could move the ball in the midfield, but they couldn’t ever sustain it long enough to be dangerous. They were dangerous when they could isolate forwards on a defender though. S. Smith's defending especially wasn't very good today.

Same starting lineup, but players were on their normal sides.

New things
- Klinger was back. Looked physically ok, but a little rusty.
- Murdock warmed up but still didn’t play.
- Bray at outside back was new.
- Harrison also played a lot of outside back. Can’t remember if she has been there in earlier games.

RE: Women’s soccer 2025 - cardfan77 - 08-28-2025

Yes, Harrison has played wingback prior as well as forward.

It was great to see Klinger back. Now we just need our defenders to get healthy. Bhuta, Murdock, Emri and I think even freshman Tay are injured. That’s a lot of talent on the sideline. The team will need all them when they start playing tougher competitions. 

Great win tonight!

RE: Women’s soccer 2025 - BostonCard - 08-28-2025

I think aggregate scoring is up to 25-2 over the course of the first five games.  Just for comparison, last year we had outscored our opponents 12-1 through five games, and our last national title year, in 2019, we outscored opponents 26-3 in our first five games (skewed a bit by a 9-0 thumping of USF, though to be fair, the wins included two ranked teams).  Nice start.

BC
Scoring highlights:
Aikey’s first
https://x.com/stanfordwsoccer/status/1961252418278359397?s=46

Montoya with a nice feed to Kohler
https://x.com/stanfordwsoccer/status/1961253675986559387?s=46

Harvey with a Macario-like placed shot:
https://x.com/stanfordwsoccer/status/1961254762575548557?s=46

Kohler with a beautiful give and go for her second:
https://x.com/stanfordwsoccer/status/1961269727315333395?s=46

Aikey with her brace:
https://x.com/stanfordwsoccer/status/1961270491827552348?s=46

Evan’s goal (confirmed on sides on video replay)
https://x.com/stanfordwsoccer/status/1961274423182585945?s=46

As noted by Hieronymous, really good finishing, though a lot of these goals still reflect poor clearances by the defense. Better teams won’t let us hang around in the box as much.

BC
Sorry, autocorrect keeps changing Aikey to Ailey.  Too lazy to fix…

BC

RE: Women’s soccer 2025 - Hieronymus - 09-04-2025

On to USC. Same starting lineup. Pianim starting for USC at LF.

Fast start but it should be 1:0. Aikey didn’t need to be offsides there. 

Kohler and Harvey are just wrecking the USC midfield so far. Really impressive ball hawking early.

Now 1:0 Kitahata scores off a turnover. Thought that might have been a foul on Montoya to get the ball to Kitahata, but I will take it. 

USC has settled down some after the first 15 minutes.

Absurd no call there. Obvious card and no advantage. West coast officiating in college is complete trash. Fortunately, it’s less of an issue in women’s games, but that is terrible,

RE: Women’s soccer 2025 - Hieronymus - 09-04-2025

Hieronymus dateline='[url=tel:1757036914' Wrote:  1757036914[/url]']
On to USC. Same starting lineup. Pianim starting for USC at LF.

Fast start but it should be 1:0. Aikey didn’t need to be offsides there. 

Kohler and Harvey are just wrecking the USC midfield so far. Really impressive ball hawking early.

Now 1:0 Kitahata scores off a turnover. Thought that might have been a foul on Montoya to get the ball to Kitahata, but I will take it. 

USC has settled down some after the first 15 minutes.

Absurd no call there. Obvious card and no advantage. West coast officiating in college is complete trash. Fortunately, it’s less of an issue in women’s games, but that is terrible,

Half finishes 1:0. Mostly really good - midfield has been dominant - but there have been concerning moments on defense when USC manages to get forward.