WCC Pre-Season Rankings

Pilots Tabbed As Favorite In 2009 WCC Women’s Soccer Preseason Poll


SAN BRUNO, Calif. --- The University of Portland garnered the maximum seven first place votes and was selected as the preseason favorite in the 2009 West Coast Conference women’s soccer head coaches preseason poll. The Pilots are followed in the poll by 2008 NCAA Tournament participant San Diego, which was picked second, Santa Clara third, and Pepperdine tabbed fourth. Rounding out this year’s poll was Loyola Marymount, picked fifth, followed by Gonzaga in sixth, San Francisco in seventh, and Saint Mary’s eighth.

The Pilots, who captured their second consecutive conference title and fourth in the last five seasons in 2008, have won a WCC record 10 conference crowns. Portland welcomes back nine starters and 18 letterwinners overall from last year’s team that posted a 20-2-0 overall record and advanced to its fifth consecutive NCAA Tournament quarterfinals. In addition to earning to the top spot in the preseason poll, the Pilots also landed the most players on the WCC preseason all-conference team in seniors Kelsey Davis and Michelle Enyeart, junior Sophie Schmidt, and sophomore Danielle Foxhoven.

San Diego returns eight starters including 21 letterwinners overall from last year’s squad that posted a 15-5-3 overall record and advanced to the second round of the NCAA Tournament. The Toreros, who posted a program-best 6-1 WCC record last season, will be led by 2008 All-WCC first team member Jackie Zinke, who was also named to the preseason all-conference team, and Natalie Garcia, Elissa Magracia, and Stephanie Ochs, all of whom were named to the 2008 All-WCC freshman team.

The Santa Clara Broncos were decimated with injuries during the 2008 season, resulting in a disappointing 4-12-4 record. The Broncos are led by a trio of seniors who were named to the WCC preseason all-conference team in Kiki Bosio, Dani Potts, and Katherine Reynolds.

Pepperdine narrowly edged rival Loyola Marymount for fourth place in the preseason poll. The Waves and the Lions return two of the best forwards in the conference in Laura Cole and Lily Sorentino, both of whom were selected to the preseason all-conference squad.

Rounding out this year’s poll is Gonzaga (16), San Francisco (12), and Saint Mary’s (11). The Zags and the Gaels will both be under new leadership this season as Amy Edwards takes over the helm of the Gonzaga program and Kai Edwards assumes the head coach position at Saint Mary’s. Gonzaga will look to 2008 All-WCC first team member Sheridan Jones, selected to the preseason all-conference team, for leadership. The Dons begin their third season under Head Coach Mark Carr and should benefit from the return of eight starters.

2009 WCC Women’s Soccer Preseason Coaches Poll
1. Portland – 49 (7)
2. San Diego – 41
3. Santa Clara – 38 (1)
4. Pepperdine – 29
5. Loyola Marymount – 28
6. Gonzaga – 16
7. San Francisco – 12
8. Saint Mary’s – 11

2009 WCC Women’s Soccer Preseason All-Conference Team
Kiki Bosio, SCU
Laura Cole, PEP
Kelsey Davis, POR
Michelle Enyeart, POR
Danielle Foxhoven, POR
Sheridan Jones, GON
Dani Potts, SCU
Katherine Reynolds, SCU
Sophie Schmidt, POR
Lily Sorentino, LMU
Jackie Zinke, USD

You people living out there who have been following this longer than I would know better, but it seems to me that Santa Clara has been getting a awful lot of good new recruits lately. I think they may be tremendously improved this year and could be UP's main threat in the conference.

I think a really BIG oversight is ...Ummm???? Hello????....Where's Keelin???

No Ellie? And No Jessica?

Can a freshman make pre-season team? HA!... I'm sure Cloee could replace few on the list!!

GO PILOTS!!!

GUPhantom wrote:I think a really BIG oversight is ...Ummm???? Hello????....Where's Keelin???

No Ellie? And No Jessica?

Can a freshman make pre-season team? HA!... I'm sure Cloee could replace few on the list!!

GO PILOTS!!!

That stuff will wash out. A bigger issue is that Santa Clara is underestimated, IMO.

Jerry has seen to it that injuries won't be a problem this year by getting 30+ players. I think USD should hold its celebration party now.

What's the Geezer motto?

Spoiler:

OK, I mean other than "let's have a Pliny" ~ Purplegeezer 2007

Yah...SCU especially dangerous since this year's match is in their house @Buck Shaw!

fan from afar wrote:You people living out there who have been following this longer than I would know better, but it seems to me that Santa Clara has been getting a awful lot of good new recruits lately. I think they may be tremendously improved this year and could be UP's main threat in the conference.

I think others of us also believe that Santa Clara could be near the top of the heap, not only in the WCC, but nationally. It depends in part on whether their previously injured players are fully healthy. Also, if I were them, I'd be sandbagging as much as possible. They're the wild card.

For the Pilots' sake, I hope Santa Clara will return to past strength. Their very poor record last year may be what cost the Pilots one of the four #1 seeds. We need them to be strong for RPI purposes. If they are as strong as some of us think they might be, I could see three West Coast teams playing at the College Cup.

Well, clearly Garrett isn't understimating Santa Clara... he voted them #1. Of course, he can't vote for the Pilots, but still... he sees them as the Pilots' main threat.

And unless they have a third consecutive year of horrific luck with injuries, they should be a top 10, maybe even top 5, type team.

Their 2009 schedule seems to brutal. Besides WCC foes, their out of conference games include Purdue and Notre Dame...then they play USC, Stanford and California...in that order! Ouch! Good Luck! The good thing is...(if there is one)...is that they play all these matches at home AND they have more bodies on their roster. They'll either come out of their non-conference games primed and ready to beat up on the WCC ...or might be trying to hold another tough season together. I think the former..."never underestimate Santa Clara"!

GO PILOTS!!!

GUPhantom wrote:Their 2009 schedule seems to brutal. Besides WCC foes, their out of conference games include Purdue and Notre Dame...then they play USC, Stanford and California...in that order! Ouch! Good Luck! The good thing is...(if there is one)...is that they play all these matches at home AND they have more bodies on their roster. They'll either come out of their non-conference games primed and ready to beat up on the WCC ...or might be trying to hold another tough season together. I think the former..."never underestimate Santa Clara"!

GO PILOTS!!!

UPSF - Wouldn't Santa Clara's tough schedule be good for our RPI, especially assuming we beat them?

fan from afar wrote:UPSF - Wouldn't Santa Clara's tough schedule be good for our RPI, especially assuming we beat them?

If Santa Clara has a good season, it will be great for our RPI. What hurt last year was not their strength of schedule (which goes into our RPI Element 3), but their own won/loss record (which goes into our Element 2 and also, through our other common opponents such as each other WCC team, into our Element 3). As a reminder, Element 1 is our own win/loss record; Element 2 is the average of our opponents' win/loss records against opponents other than us; and Element 3 is the average of our opponents' opponents' win/loss records. For element 3, this means that in addition to our WCC opponents' records going into our Element 2, each WCC opponent's record also counts 7 times in our element 3. In effective weighting, Element 1 counts for about 50% of our RPI; Element 2 counts for about 40%; and Element 3 counts for about 10%.

If Santa Clara has a really great season and we beat them, it's the best of all possible worlds since it will give a boost to every RPI element -- unless we're undefeated, of course, in which case you can't boost an RPI Element 1 that already is at 100%. Which I believe is a distinct possibility.

It seems that beating Santa Clara would boost our w/l record even if we are at 100% (since if we didn't beat them, we wouldn't be 100%). Or am I missing something.

Beating them would improve our wins total, but if we are perfect going in, it does nothing for our wins percentage.

100% + 1 = 100%

Purplegeezer wrote:100% + 1 = 100%

You mean all that "give 110%" stuff they feed you in high school is flat out malarkey? How am I supposed to be motivated now?

Well, DTR - I too feel very unmotivated now, but I guess by definition you can't give more than 100% - if you are giving 100%, that is all you have to give. I know, how about this - the extra 10% is what you do when you schmooze up the coach to get more playing time - you know, wash his dirty car, date his ugly daughter, carry the equipment in every day, compliment his stupid tactics.

DaTruRochin wrote:
You mean all that "give 110%" stuff they feed you in high school is flat out malarkey? How am I supposed to be motivated now?

I never payed a lot of attention to coaches who asked 110%. I figured they were mathematically challenged. That's why they were coaches and not mathematicians.

I even rebelled if they asked me to give it my all. I figured if I did, I'd be dead at the end.I liked running but I didn't want to end up like Pheidippides.

"Try your hardest" wasn't any better. Who knows what your hardest is until you fail? If you used that as the test, You'd always be on the brink of disaster, which doesn't seem to be a way to approach any sport. Besides, movies of those Marathon guys flopping down dead at the finish line were always distasteful. It seemed like poor pacing. This was in the days of cinder tracks. I did everything to avoid hitting those.

When a coach told me to "finish strong", What raced through my mind is a) "I'll finish with what I have left" and b) Aren't you the guy that told me to give 110%? What percentage of that do you think I have left? Goes back to pacing.


My old coach did best with me by asking 51%. The way he asked for it was to tell me to try to be a better than half-fast runner.

I'd HATE to lose to a half-fast runner.

Which half would he be missing? Wouldn't that make it hard to run at all? I'm picturing running behind him. Not pretty.

fan from afar wrote: how about this - the extra 10% is what you do when you schmooze up the coach to get more playing time - you know, wash his dirty car, date his ugly daughter, carry the equipment in every day, compliment his stupid tactics.

Therein lies the reason why my footballing career never made it past high school :-P

Besides, movies of those Marathon guys flopping down dead at the finish line were always distasteful. It seemed like poor pacing.

And THAT is the reason why I never, ever have any inkling to run 26 7/32 contiguous miles...

Wow this thread has become almost like the philosophy class I took in College. Needless to say I wasn't a fan, and even think that I dropped that class mid way through.

Well, finally feel like I have started to break out of my PilotNation Summer hibernation... good to be back, now lets see if I can join the 1000 post club this season.

Wasn't Philosophy a required class? It was back in the Stone Age when I attended. Wasn't my favorite, either.

up7587 wrote:Wasn't Philosophy a required class? It was back in the Stone Age when I attended. Wasn't my favorite, either.

We had to take 4 classes at UP... Oddly enough my interest in Philosophy seemed to be directly related with wine consumption...

up7587 wrote:Wasn't Philosophy a required class? It was back in the Stone Age when I attended. Wasn't my favorite, either.

Not at state school

This discussion reminds me of what a close friend of mine, adopted uncle of my grand-daughter Zoey, yelled out when his own 8-year old was playing in a soccer game and said she was tired and asked, could she come out and get a rest. His call to her? "You can rest when you're dead!" Now, in his defense, I know him and know he knew she would think he was nuts and funny. He said, though, that he got some great looks from the other parents!

DaTruRochin wrote:

up7587 wrote:Wasn't Philosophy a required class? It was back in the Stone Age when I attended. Wasn't my favorite, either.

We had to take 4 classes at UP... Oddly enough my interest in Philosophy seemed to be directly related with wine consumption...

Science majors only needed 3.

Richard Askay FTW.

PurplePrideTrumpet wrote:Science majors only needed 3.

Richard Askay FTW.

Yes indeed!!! Askay's Metaphysics class was the only philosophy class I could stomach.

There are a couple of big teams missing from our UP schedule this yr... Pilots should have a great season....compared to last yr the competetion looks easier than the yr before .. Lucky Pilots..SHOULD BE A GREAT SEASON..we have a few great recruits ourselves and am looking forward to this Years WINS!