Pilots vs. UCLA, Sat. 11/28, 5pm, Los Angeles

The loss of of a player of Cloee's calibur as well as of Michelle E. would hurt any team. However, from everything that I can tell as a person who saw the stats but did not get to watch the game, this was a team loss. We were outshot 14-1 in the first half when all of the scoring took place and 19-7 for the game. There have been plenty of games this season where Portland was more physical, and this time we were not. At this point in the tourney, if a team dominates the shots on goal statistic and/or corner kicks, they are probably dominating the mid-field as well and will most likely win. As much as I love our team, we lost to the better team yesterday.

Yeah...you're right, Onetouch. Frankly, I'm a little embarrassed at how outplayed the Pilots were last night. We lose a few, but we are rarely manhandled. I'm still feeling sick over it.

It's nice that Danielle Foxhoven talked in the Oregonian about how the team was awesome and had a good season, but they weren't awesome last night, and it's got to be disappointing to continue getting bounced by UCLA. That's one team that really seems to have our number.

one touch and pms

Did you see the game last night or are you going from the stats?

I ask because I'd really like to hear from someone who saw the game. The stats can be deceptive: I know that from watching games this year and then looking at the stats.

Clearly UP was under the cosh int he first half. Without having seen the game I have no way of knowing what was happening.

I was only able to hear the game and track the stats. But, it was obvious in the first half who was in control. From what I could gather, Portland played better in the second half--particularly the last 10 to 15 minutes, but they weren't able to get any luck going their way. They had a flurry of good shots taken toward the end, but they were hitting the crossbar, etc.

I did not see the game. I know that there are times when some crazy things can count as shots on goal, and Portland definitely played better in the second half. But, no matter how much you skew the stats one shot on goal in the first half is not good. Being down in games like this is just as demoralizing as being ahead is invigorating in my opinion. UCLA probably felt like time was on their side once they took the lead.

Why!? Why do we seem to fall apart against UCLA? Ahhhhh! I hate it!!!

this is what i love most about this program an always have. does anyone see a similarity in these photos??

http://photos.oregonlive.com/oregonian/2009/11/pilots_vs_bruins_14.html

http://blog.oregonlive.com/idahosportugal/2007/11/pilots_dont_love_la.html

Folks

"We" did not fall apart against UCLA. Missing two starters - including a possible first team all-American, we lost 2-1 on the road. And the first goal was a brutal deflection that Kelsey had covered.

I know that close only counts in horseshoes, but reading Garrett's comments I don't think he was embarrassed by the game, and I don't think we should be either.

I'm disappointed that the Pilots did not win but it doesn't sound like the A&M game to me, when they did get a spanking. This was much closer than that.

amen 'arry, amen.
michelle 'e' is virtually irreplacable. how many players are there in this country that have her speed, ball skills, vision, an scoring abilities?!!

Definitely a big disappointment to lose again down there. I thought this was the year. Second tier? Like any sport small things separate the elite. We host those 3 years rather than UCLA and we have a good shot at being 3-0 rathr than 0-3. I remember the ND game in '05. If we had to go to their place to play them then we have a much more difficult time. I remember Cori defending a lot of shots and the fan support was one of the things that allowed us to advance. Yes Sinc was something else (Her first goal in '02 championship I have watched on the DVD countless times ) but this year we had so many weapons.

We do need to play more top 25 teams every year. Just look at Stanford or UNC schedule the last few years. Both those programs get more conference high level competition then we do. We have done games with UCLA, UNC, USC, FL, and FSU, PSU, and A&M who are consistently top 25 programs, but we need to also do Stanford, ND, WF, BC, Vir, UCF, UGA, WV, S. Car, LSU, BYU, OK St, VT, Duke as the travel budget allows. We (or UW) have brought in teams from the East like Columbia, Kennesaw st, Colgate, Yale, so why not teams with higher RPI? Less with the likes of Mont, Colgate, NA, Rhode Is, . Good news is our NW Pac 10 partners are getting very strong. (I am a little worried about UW and WSU recruiting ( I assume OSU will attract interest with their showing this year and Lauren looks to have some top kids coming in for 2011 at UO.)

Yes, keep it all in perspective. One of my favorite pics from book on 2005 season was the girls studying for finals on the floor of the some airport. We don't have to feel too sorry for these gals. They have the joy of playing on the Bluff, plus they "earned" their degrees.

If you want to feel sorry for someone, think about those UO or OSU football player prepping for the Civil War who doesn't go in the draft and only makes it through class with the help of their athletic dept tutor. Good luck to them finding a job in this economy.

Harry Redknapp wrote:Folks

"We" did not fall apart against UCLA. Missing two starters - including a possible first team all-American, we lost 2-1 on the road. And the first goal was a brutal deflection that Kelsey had covered.

I know that close only counts in horseshoes, but reading Garrett's comments I don't think he was embarrassed by the game, and I don't think we should be either.

I'm disappointed that the Pilots did not win but it doesn't sound like the A&M game to me, when they did get a spanking. This was much closer than that.

I listened to the game (did not see it), and I guess I disagree. Except for the last ten minutes, UCLA dominated like we usually do. They had most of the possession and created BY FAR most of the dangerous situations. If you create enough scoring opportunities, you usually eventually score, even if there is some luck involved, and they did. The shots on goal stat speaks for itself, but having listened, I can say it also reflected the flow of the game. It's 3-1 if they score on the penalty kick, which score I think probably reflected the flow of the game.

I thought the game was EXTREMELY well-announced, but even so, without being there, it is hard to feel confident about "knowing" things for sure. Having said that, it sounded like we were just playing defense without possession - in other words, just clearing the ball and not looking to possess and build an attack. I have thought all year that that was a problem with the team. It didn't show itself much against most teams, because we were able to dominate possession so thoroughly, but it did show up in a few games, and I was worried about it showing up a lot against the UCLA's and Stanfords of the world.

It is difficult to play a possession game against a good team that can force you to play defense for long periods if you can't possess the ball from your defensive end. It is very difficult mentally to be pushed back into your defensive end for long periods just trying to survive, to finally win a possession, and then to KEEP possession, to advance with a series of short passes until things open up. The temptation is to just finally relieve the pressure by sending it forward, but - the result is usually just more defending, then another long ball, then more defending etc etc. It sounded like that is what was happening, and listening to the game, I KNEW it was just going to be a question of time until they scored. To beat a team with two outstanding attackers like that, you have to limit their opportunities, with ball possession, and we just were not doing that. We weren't possessing from the defensive end, and when we did win possession in the midfield, it sounded like we were making too many unforced bad passes.

As to why it happened - I have no idea. Was UCLA putting tons of pressure on us? Was the physical play a big factor? Were we just having an off day? Were we tired or loggy from nerves? Was missing Michelle more devastating than we thought? Is it that difficult to play at UCLA? Are we just not a good road team? Were they just a better team (I don't think so)? All the above? I don't know. I did see the UCLA-USC game, and I thought we would be able to control the midfield against UCLA and deny their scorers a lot of chances. Didn't happen. That's why they play the games. A replay could produce an opposite result.

Anyway - it WAS a great season. As someone else said, you know you are a top tier program when you are disappointed at having only reached the quarter finals. And, as someone else said, I wouldn't trade our style of play no matter how many painful losses. I also wouldn't trade the quality of people in the program for anyone anywhere else. GO PILOTS IN 2010!!

I don't really like the words "fall apart." I think that a team can sometimes play with composure and just lose to the better team. Without Cloee and Michelle E. they are better than we are, and injuries and changes throughout the season are part of the game. Again, we we're out shot 19-7 and 14-1 in the first half. So, yes, we did outshoot them 6-5 in the second half, but, by then it was too little too late.

We did not fall apart, and there's nothing to hang the heads about. However, if we had got this win it would have been a steal that we quite frankly would not have deserved. Sometimes that happens in soccer through counter attacks when a team doesn't dominate possession but still is able to convert, however, you cannot count on it. My experience is that the team that dominates shots on goal statistically and dominates the mid-field wins most of the games.

Frankly, UCLA is doing to us what ND used to do. You can only win these types of games when the opponent dominates possession for half of the game if you have players who can consistently make the most of counter attacks like Christine Sinclair used to do. We have had some great forwards over the years, however, none have been as consistent as Sinclair in the biggest games.

Congrats on another great season, Pilots! We'll continue to support you and lead the nation again in attendance next year.

Just one guy's opinion, but being at the game, UCLA was the better team on this night and unfortunately, things did not go our way. Not having heard the game, I am not sure what those listening may have pictured. That being said, here is what it looked like to me.

First - we were all EXTREMELY proud of the team and the heart they showed, never giving up and putting UCLA under tremendous pressure at the end of the game. I truly thought we would score again up until the final whistle blew after a flurry of dangerous corner kicks. We definitely had UCLA on the ropes at the end and just could not find the back of the net.

We started off looking as though we would be able to possess and we had a wonderful score with Kendra and Danielle connecting early. It may sound crazy, but this early goal may have been a little detrimental, as we immediately seemed to go into a defensive mindset, as if we would be able to hold that lead for the entire game by defending instead of attacking. UCLA then had the run of play for the remainder of the half and seemed to gain confidence as they put us on our heels and we became tentative I thought.

Their first goal was just very unlucky for us as it deflected off our defender and crawled into the goal. This occurred almost right after a "non call" where Cheney pushed down Keelin at midfield and UCLA had us off balance as they attacked. (I think everyone thought there was going to be a foul called, but more on that below). Kelsey had a beat on the shot and it simply changed direction and there was nothing she could do. Cheney had a great touch and finish on their second goal, which is why she is on the national team. They deserve credit as they are an excellent team and we knew things would have to go right for us to come out on top. That is one reason I think we need to be able to host this game and do whatever we have to do to be a number one seed, as I truly think it would have been a different game at Merlo for a number of reasons.

I must say also that I thought the referee did a poor job and I thought it truly affected the game. I realize that may sound like sour grapes, but here is what it looked like at the field. UCLA was strong, fast and physical. Several times they had physical tackles and pushed or fouled us to gain a possession without a whistle blowing, only to have a call made against us within 3 or 4 passes after that as we tried to play the same physical game. This seemed to frustrate us. It absolutely hamstrings a team when a game is inconsistently called. If the referee is going to let it be a physical game, this needs to be called the same for both teams and I thought on this night it was not.

To give you an idea, Lisa and Garrett were actually up off the bench with their arms in the air talking to the ref and letting him know that they were not impressed. You know it is not a well officiated game if this occurs. I overheard that the ref was on a first name basis with many of the UCLA players. This is not unusual for a ref, but this is one reason why I think it would benefit us to host by being a #1 seed, along with the great home field advantage we have with the fan support and atmosphere at Merlo. Still, this is part of the game and we must be able to overcome it. Without Michelle, this was a tall order indeed and we needed a little luck on our side.

We never "fell apart" in my mind and I was not for one second embarrassed by our team, but proud of the way they fought until the end and the incredible run they made in this tournament, especially after losing Michelle (and Chloee earlier). Garrett had them of the mindset that they could win the national championship, without making any excuses. It was a season that was fantastic in so many ways. Congrats to all the girls and especially the seniors who have given us all so much to cheer to about. Looking forward to 2010 now, as I think we will be even stronger. It appears as though the only way to secure that #1 seed is to go undefeated, so I am sure that will be their first order of business next year. How sweet it would be to have a quarterfinal with UCLA or Stanford at Merlo!!!! GO PILOTS

Here is a game review from a UCLA fan, from the BigSoccer website. I only was listening, but I think it reflects what I heard on the audio broadcast:

Those first-half stats were not misleading. Portland scored nicely off a bit of defensive rashness on the touchline with Kendra Chandhoke's pressure leading to a steal and a quick feed to Danielle Foxhoven darting through the corner of the box and finishing with a precise shot near-post. But that turned out to be Portland's only shot of the first half as the Bruins outshot them something like 14-1.

I was surprised how much the Bruins dominated possession and applied pressure in the attack although Portland defended stoutly and avoided major breakdowns except for Cheney's goal in the first half and the penalty kick when Chelsea Cline was taken down as she made straight for goal.

I thought Zakiya Bywaters especially played a tremendous first half, darting back from midfield to challenge Portland's forwards for the ball and really disrupting Portland's possession. Meanwhile the Bruins were getting the ball across midfield to their "post-up" players -- Cheney, Leroux, and Larsen -- who were very successful at holding up the ball against converging defenders until offensive support came.

It was Larsen's ability to hold the ball that led to Kylie Wright's goal. A bit of luck, too, on the deflection that had Kelsey Davis going the wrong way & unable to recover. But with all the pressure UCLA was mounting it felt like they had earned having one ball break the right way. It came from good possession and from putting the ball on frame. Kylie has such a strong leg she doesn't always need to blast a shot to cause trouble -- the important thing for her is to get it on frame.

Portland's defender made a mistake on Cheney's goal, misjudging its flight and missing on her header, but it was a good quick long ball forward and Lauren, when she saw the ball might go over the defender, went behind her and cleanly collected it with a beautiful touch to send her one-on-one with the GK, who she beat with a fine left-footed strike to the far-post side.

It felt like it might be over when Cline was taken down and UCLA was awarded the PK but Cheney's miss off the crossbar gave Portland new life although it took a while for them to swing momentum their way. But the last 15 to 20 minutes increasingly felt like UCLA was hanging on. In fact, Portland controlled the last 20 minutes about as completely as UCLA controlled the last 40 of the 1st half.

Funny how that goes. It's not like I saw a conscious decision to play a prevent defense but little by little it seemed like UCLA didn't want to get beat with too many players forward so little by little UCLA couldn't maintain any attacking pressure, so Portland started bringing more players on the attack and pretty soon the game was being played deeper and deeper in UCLA's end of the field.

Damn I hate that ("the only thing a prevent defense does is prevent your own team from winning") but after the missed PK, it felt inevitable. Portland is too good to go without a fight. You could see glimpses even in the 1st half of some of the individual talent that Portland's possession style is built on - for example the ability to receive passes cleanly with control. Perhaps they lack a little speed. They certainly missed not having Michelle Enyeart (injured as most people here know on the last day of the regular season). On a team with many superb players, I thought she always stood out as perhaps their best player once Megan Rapinoe left for the pros. People who follow Portland might put Sophie Schmidt up there -- that was certainly an incredible blast from 35 yards on the free kick late in the 2nd half that Chante Sandiford made a great save on, leaping to palm it over the crossbar.

Watching UCLA-Portland is one of the biggest thrills in the college game. I feel a little for them that they've had to play UCLA in Westwood 3 out of the last 4 years in the quarterfinals. It's time they met again in the College Cup.

Ah, destiny. In this game, even when it's going your way it's more than a little semi-tough.

Thanks for sharing that with us UPSF. I think that it was a well-written, unbiased game review from a Bruin fan, no less. I found it interesting that he got nervous when UCLA went into their "prevent defense" after their missed PK. This made it easier for the Pilots to pepper their goal at the end of the game. Earlier posts by UP fans commented how the Pilots were hurt by going into a more defensive posture after their goal to start the game. Maybe the moral to all of this is to try and keep an offensive mindset even when up a goal. As the saying goes: The best defense is a good offense.

UPFan

Thanks for taking the time to let us know how it looked. There's no substitute for first hand reports.

ohhh_yeah wrote:ummm...

Posted by 20yearpilotfan
November 28, 2009, 6:13PM

"Half-time with UP outshot 18-1 by UCLA ....... Ah, yes - the Lady Pilot Soccer fans, as I have been saying since the playoff seeding, have had their partisan heads in the sand - do any of you examine the talent and listen to and/or watch the play of the top teams throughout the season and in the playoffs? Portland, my favorite team for 20 years, is clearly 2nd tier this year. UCLA fans have not "crowded" their stadium to see this "footnote" prior to the Final Four next weekend (today's attendance is only the 2nd largest of their season). Pilot fans are now free to acknowledge my clear vision and to spend time next weekend helping out at shelters for the homeless or some other work of social justice - a great opportunity to live in the real world and stop wishing Portland was #1 (or #2 or #3 or #4). Portland had it's days-in-the-sun with the extraordinary talent of Christine Sinclair....it's unlikely to happen again."

http://www.oregonlive.com/pilots/index.ssf/2009/11/ucla_dominates_action_in_first.html

I largely agree. Since Sinclair left, we have only been a top 8 team. Clive Charles, a wonderful man of so much dignity, brought her in and we won big. Another big difference is that Garrett Smith doesn't have Charles' class. After elimination games, he whines. It's either the officials, starters missing due to national team call-ups or being a visiting team. It's sickening. Can the parents of prospective recruits be impressed with this cry-baby?

And here's something else: When was the last time the Pilots had gone for 80 straight minutes without a shot? They were the highest scoring team in the nation. And yet Smith said, "I thought we did everything we could to tie the game." 80 straight minutes showing nothing was “everything?” Gimme a break. Let's try embracing reality.

I seriously doubt the Pilots will ever win again under Smith. Did anyone think this team was prepared Saturday? Playing a soft schedule surely didn't help. If they were out-manned, then Smith hasn't done a good enough job of getting the players needed. And if they were of equal talent and simply out-played, then Smith hasn't done an adequate job of coaching.

I'll leave it to some of you Oregonians who are much closer to the team then I am to answer the Garrett criticism, especially about the whining (I've never seen it, or read it, but I am not out there). I will just say that, at least from a this distance, I couldn't disagree more. I think he is a class act and UP is lucky to have him. According to SF's logic, if we don't win every game every year, Garrett should be replaced - either he didn't recruit good enough players, or he didn't prepare them properly. Well, try this - if we had good enough players, it was Garrett who recruited them. If we didn't have good enough players, then he did a great coaching job resulting in a one-loss regular season. Come on, SF - a one loss regular season, quarter finals for however many years, and you're putting down the coach? ONLY a top 8 team?!?!? You act like Garrett wasn't the coach of the highest scoring team in the nation, or the coach who lost only 1 regular season game, but was only the coach of the team that lost to UCLA.

I suppose there's a chance Portland could be better next year with recruits that weren't able to get admitted to Stanford. Funny thing. There’s this sad poster called "Clive Charles Lover" or something like that who spends virtually all his time on the BigSoccer board. And he once even said the Pilots would be a stronger team with new recruits the year after Stephanie Lopez left. Talk about delusional. I hope everyone next season will be more rational about expectations.

Anyway, I’ll be at Texas A&M this weekend. I’ll enjoy it.

I was going to start a new thread to improve my stats, but something motivated me to post this here. It says something about how lucky we are to be Pilots fans.

These are collected data from the last 15 years, including this year to date. In order, they are the team, its number of NCAA quarterfinal, semi-final, and final appearances and its number of wins, and the total of those numbers:

North Carolina - 13 - 12 - 9 - 7 - 41
Notre Dame - 12 - 10 - 6 - 2 - 30
Portland - 12 - 7 - 3 - 2 - 24
UCLA - 10 - 8 - 3 - 0 - 21
Santa Clara - 11 - 7 - 2 - 1 - 21
Connecticut - 9 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 13
Florida State - 6 - 4 - 1 - 0 - 11
Penn State - 8 - 3 - 0 - 0 - 11
Stanford - 3 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 5
Texas A&M - 4 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 4
USC - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 4
Clemson - 4 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 4

With a total of 2, both quarterfinal losses: Duke, Virginia, Nebraska, Maryland

With a total of 2, a quarterfinal win and a semifinal loss: Princeton and SMU

With a total of 1, all semifinal losses: Boston College, Wake Forest, West Virginia, Illinois, Ohio State, Washington, BYU, Michigan, Hartford, Dartmouth, Harvard, William & Mary, and NC State

Sinclair Fan wrote:I suppose there's a chance Portland could be better next year with recruits that weren't able to get admitted to Stanford. Funny thing. There’s this sad poster called "Clive Charles Lover" or something like that who spends virtually all his time on the BigSoccer board. And he once even said the Pilots would be a stronger team with new recruits the year after Stephanie Lopez left. Talk about delusional. I hope everyone next season will be more rational about expectations.

Anyway, I’ll be at Texas A&M this weekend. I’ll enjoy it.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with having high expectations and hopes for a team that finishes in the top 8 to Final 4 year after year and has 2 national championships. Yes, we're spoiled fans, however, this team sets high goals for itself. As for me, we faced so much of a struggle just getting our first national championship...and I was so excited to see it, that every good season since then is just gravy.

In women's soccer with injuries and national team call-ups and everything else, the best team isn't always on the field...so you can't always know if a team is under-rated or over-rated.
We have brilliant players and coaches who play with a lot of dignity, and quite frankly I just want to enjoy the ride every year.

I don't pretend to know very much about soccer, so probably my input isn't that useful, but it seems to me that Sinclair was one of those once-in-a-lifetime kind of players. I wonder if either Clive or Garrett would have won either of their national championships without her. While we have been a very good team since her departure, I think she was probably the key ingredient in our national championships. I think the level of the program has been very good and really not that different than it has been for the past 15 years. All you have to do is look at the struggles of the men's soccer team this past decade to see how difficult it is for a school like UP to maintain its excellence in an extremely competitive Div I environment. I think, when everything is said and done, Coach Smith has done a pretty good job. Then again I was a student-athlete on the Bluff in the early 1980s when women's athletics was NAIA, the men's soccer team was losing regularly to teams like Warner Pacific, and we were playing men's basketball games at Lewis and Clark College or in Howard Hall. And those of us on the track team had to carpool to some of our meets in our own vehicles because other teams had the vans and there wasn't enough money in the budget to get us other transportation. So, I guess I might be more impressed with where most of UP's athletic programs are today than I should be given the perspective that I have.

Yes, we have lots to celebrate about being UP fans.


I join Sinclair Fan in Celebrating Christine's accomplishments on both the playing field and in the classroom.

As any Sinclair fan knows, she was the NCAA scholar athlete in 2005, in addition to being the Mac-Herman winner and NCAA athlete of the year.

We have to admit that's a special person, One most of our competitors have never seen the likes of.

This year we can celebrate that UP was the only school in the NCAA to place TWO athletes on the NCAA soccer All Academic first team.

Stanford place one athlete on that team, UCLA placed none.

Thanks for the info Fanatic. I was just about to go searching for this as well. First class coaches, players, fans and 99.9% of the bloggers!!

"I seriously doubt the Pilots will ever win again under Smith."--Sinclair Fan.

You've got to be kidding me. You seriousy believe this? Smith is responsible for half of our University's national titles. We did not begin to lead the nation in attendance until he was coach. I'm not even sure why I'm responding to a comment like this; it's just completely ridiculous.

Although I absolutely loved Clive, we have to remember that success comes in cycles. Clive struggled to beat ND and other teams for years before we broke through, and yes, we were dominated at times by ND and other teams. Sometimes the game plan was a little conservative, but, in the end we finally broke through and won a national title. You've got to remember the good with the bad when you think of the past...even if it is okay to put Clive on a pedestal.