Stanford draw 14-13. Very good.
Stanford cards 5-3. 4 Green 1 Yellow. UNC 2 green 1 yellow. Not good.
Shots on goal. Stanford 14-22 UNC 23-29. Not good. UNC got more shots and better quality shots.
Free position. Stanford 2-4, UNC 1-3. Good.
Clears. Stanford 21-23 UNC 18-18. Not good.
Turnovers. Stanford 20, UNC 14. Not good at all.
Without Lucy Pearson's outstanding game, 9 saves and in one sequence she had 3 saves in the first quarter, the score would have been worse. The defense gave up lots of open looks when we were face guarding Humphrey, which is why I think we stopped after the first quarter.
Chloe Humphrey was face guarded in the first quarter by different players (I noted Frist, Case, Bouvier) 1 assist and 0-3 shooting. Humphrey ended up with 3 goals and 1 assist on 7-7 shooting. Tied with Levy and Patillo for most points and tied with Patillo for most goals. No good plan to slow her down.
The worst game of the quarter finals. Stanford never led, all the other games both teams had leads in the games (Johns Hopkins led for 1 second at the end). The ACC top two teams should never have met in the quarter finals. Stanford losing to Villanova sunk them (I know I'm beating a dead horse, but if they win they would have faced Johns Hopkins (Big Ten), Stony Brook (CAA) or Navy (Patriot League) in the quarter final).
Regarding transfers, I only know of three transfers. Alexandra Crerend (Brown 2014-2016 A), Madison McPherson (Johns Hopkins 2024, D) and Mallory Hasselbeck (Boston College 2026 A). We need a defender to replace Bellisimo, a two-way midfielder to replace Frist and a draw specialist to replace Frist at a minimum. I don't see that many transfers coming in. I think this was the year to try to make a deep run and the coach screwed it up not preparing the team to attack a match-up defense, even though they played three teams in a row that played that defense.
Hoping for the best next year, but I think it will be a rebuilding season. Just my opinion.
(05-11-2026, 03:02 PM)SearchingForTheTruth Wrote: Stanford was out drawn in both games (8-20 and 7-13). Stanford needs to be even or ahead.
Fouls. In the last game Stanford had 3 green and 5 yellow cards. Need to not give UNC a player advantage.
Shots on goal. Stanford shot poorly in the second game (12-27). Need more quality chances.
Free position shots. In the first game Stanford gave up 11 and got 4. The second game it was 1-4. UNC was 8-11 and 3-4. Can't give up easy scoring opportunities.
Clears. The last game Stanford failed to clear twice. That can give UNC fast break opportunities. Need to have 100% clears.
I believe in the second game Stanford face guarded Chloe Humphrey. She still had 4 goals and 2 assists. Without the face guard she had 8 goals and 2 assists. I expect to see the face guard again, but UNC will be ready for it and they may just play 6 v 6, which could be an advantage for UNC if Stanford puts their best defender on Humphrey.
(05-11-2026, 02:35 PM)Papa John Wrote: Thanks for that info, SFTT. So jet lag should not be an excuse for the quarterfinals.
According to lacrossereference.com, here is what they call "The Tale of the Tape:"
Stanford North Carolina
Offensive Efficiency 9th 1st
Defensive Efficiency 4th 9th
Draw Controls 29th 6th
Save Percentage 19th 24th
LaxElo Rank 5th 1st
In any case--if I'm reading the data correctly--UNC has a better ranking than Stanford in Offensive Efficiency, Draw Controls and Elo Rank (which has to do with player skill?). Stanford is ranked better in Defensive Efficiency and Save Percentage.
Having said that Stanford scored 9 and 8 goals in the previous two meetings, while UNC scored 18 and 12.
So my question for the experts: Besides somehow slowing down Chloe Humphrey, what will it take for Stanford to pull off a h.uge upset on Thursday?