12-10-2017, 03:28 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-10-2017, 03:56 PM by Viking_Guy.)
More specifically for Terry--
The specific instances I remember were people saying they were surprised by Gunn not being poached by an MLS team. To which the chorus of responses were of the tenor "Yeah, as if we didn't have enough attendance problems..."
I think they dislike his emphasis on closing the opponent's midfield down as quickly as possible in an attempt to regain possession - not allowing a team to easily build up an attacking sequence, having multiple defenders attack the ball, basically being disruptive on defense. They want a more free-flowing game where defenders are giving ground, and the midfield is artistically dancing through with the ball at their feet.
They think that possession soccer, and that kind of ball movement, is what is attractive about soccer, I think.
The other thing I thought was that they were mistaking being willing to go to PKs with being satisfied going to PKs. Stanford won the last two championships, 3 out of 4 games, in PKs after a 0-0 draw. That is a legitimate challenge for the game - low-scoring affairs can be tough to watch. But at least the Cardinal keep attacking, even if they're not scoring, which is more than can be said for a lot of teams in tight games.
I think the men still haven't had their Catarina Macario - the player who can both be incisive with the ball at her feet AND is an elite finisher. Morris was fast and powerful, but still only is playing with one foot. Langsdorf can finish, but he's rarely going to beat anyone off a 1v1 dribbling move. Baird or Bashti might, but Baird has issues finishing and Bashti, I'm not sure Gunn trusts to hold a high workrate for an extended period. Werner might be the best combination dribbler/finisher we have.
The ACC does play a more midfield-dominated style - UVa, Wake Forest, etc. North Carolina, their one College Cup entrant, plays a 3-4-3, trying to dominate the midfield. Indiana DESTROYED them in the other semifinal, but was again, unwilling to send a lot of players forward, and after the Hoosiers went up 1-0, they played an even more defensive game.
No, I don't think they recognize the game is different than it was in the early 1990s, when Virginia was dominant, or in the mid-2000s, when a series of ACC teams won. The players are faster, fitter, and quicker. They've been playing high-level soccer their entire lives (albeit you can decide how effective the US development system is). They were complaining about ONLY getting five of the top eight seeds, and 7 of the 16. In other words, they may have a bit unrealistic baselines at this point.
It also points to a couple of other things - the still-strong regional bias of the soccer community to the ACC and Tidewater areas (with a little room for the Big 10 and specific sides), and the same issue we have with the SEC gaming the RPI in college football - there are more small-school programs to build a resume against in those areas, more leagues where you can schedule a mid-major team that will end up with a good record, rather than having to play against a small set of local rivals who know you very well and REALLY want to knock you off.
And the expectation that their priors will eventually update to conform to a different reality - well, that's about as likely as an SEC fan admitting that Alabama may not have been a deserving entrant in the college football playoff this year :).
VG
The specific instances I remember were people saying they were surprised by Gunn not being poached by an MLS team. To which the chorus of responses were of the tenor "Yeah, as if we didn't have enough attendance problems..."
I think they dislike his emphasis on closing the opponent's midfield down as quickly as possible in an attempt to regain possession - not allowing a team to easily build up an attacking sequence, having multiple defenders attack the ball, basically being disruptive on defense. They want a more free-flowing game where defenders are giving ground, and the midfield is artistically dancing through with the ball at their feet.
They think that possession soccer, and that kind of ball movement, is what is attractive about soccer, I think.
The other thing I thought was that they were mistaking being willing to go to PKs with being satisfied going to PKs. Stanford won the last two championships, 3 out of 4 games, in PKs after a 0-0 draw. That is a legitimate challenge for the game - low-scoring affairs can be tough to watch. But at least the Cardinal keep attacking, even if they're not scoring, which is more than can be said for a lot of teams in tight games.
I think the men still haven't had their Catarina Macario - the player who can both be incisive with the ball at her feet AND is an elite finisher. Morris was fast and powerful, but still only is playing with one foot. Langsdorf can finish, but he's rarely going to beat anyone off a 1v1 dribbling move. Baird or Bashti might, but Baird has issues finishing and Bashti, I'm not sure Gunn trusts to hold a high workrate for an extended period. Werner might be the best combination dribbler/finisher we have.
The ACC does play a more midfield-dominated style - UVa, Wake Forest, etc. North Carolina, their one College Cup entrant, plays a 3-4-3, trying to dominate the midfield. Indiana DESTROYED them in the other semifinal, but was again, unwilling to send a lot of players forward, and after the Hoosiers went up 1-0, they played an even more defensive game.
No, I don't think they recognize the game is different than it was in the early 1990s, when Virginia was dominant, or in the mid-2000s, when a series of ACC teams won. The players are faster, fitter, and quicker. They've been playing high-level soccer their entire lives (albeit you can decide how effective the US development system is). They were complaining about ONLY getting five of the top eight seeds, and 7 of the 16. In other words, they may have a bit unrealistic baselines at this point.
It also points to a couple of other things - the still-strong regional bias of the soccer community to the ACC and Tidewater areas (with a little room for the Big 10 and specific sides), and the same issue we have with the SEC gaming the RPI in college football - there are more small-school programs to build a resume against in those areas, more leagues where you can schedule a mid-major team that will end up with a good record, rather than having to play against a small set of local rivals who know you very well and REALLY want to knock you off.
And the expectation that their priors will eventually update to conform to a different reality - well, that's about as likely as an SEC fan admitting that Alabama may not have been a deserving entrant in the college football playoff this year :).
VG