College Cup

mattywizz, you're being too logical and not letting your emotions get in the way. I do understatnd the hate and it does sometimes get in the way of reason. To be fair, probably most UCLA fans were rooting for UNC, deep down. It is interestintg, and I am glad that everyone got to see this game to make my points. Having seen O'hara play for the last four years, I will make these observations First, she is a great player and she does deserve to be the player of the year. Second, however, for all of the Pilot Nation who think Cheney is a dirty player, what you saw today is what I have seen over the last four years, just not to this extreme. Cheney would never come from behind and kick someone in the legs like we saw O'hara do, not once, not twice but three times. Cheney will knock people off the ball from above the waist. I think a lot of the Pilot Nation actually appreciate her style of play and have commented that some of their present and past players, played the same way. The other thing that O'hara does and I will admit that Cheney has had the tendency to do but not nearly to the extreme that O'hara does, is flop. Nobody does it more than she, trust me, but today, we saw more of the back attack. Good luck to you guys next year.

Well,

Cheney threw a deliberate elbow to the head on Kassi McCkluskie and got a yellow for it - should have been a red. I think both of those players will test limits. They are both gone now. It will be interesting to see how they do at the next level.

The thing I didn't get about O'Hara today is that she got two warnings before her first yellow, then decided to clip heels in the open field in full view of everybody. Not very bright, and it sure didn't help her team's cause. They were starting to put some passes together.

It will be interesting to see how both teams rebound next year. They both lose several kay players, and from what I can see, both will need some growth from the players behind them to rise to the same level.

Chiefer, How do you see UCLA's prospects? Are they going to be able to give enough support to LeRoux next year?

So

Stanford got robbed on both of their goals. My dad and I were right by the goals that Stanford were shooting on and it was apparent that the referee's wanted UNC to win this game.

mattywizz wrote:So, I'm kind of confused here. I pretty much always root for the team that beat "my team" to win later on in a tournament. Don't you want to say that you lost to the best team and not the third or fourth best team? It seems that a lot of our regulars REALLY don't like UCLA, maybe I am a little too far removed from the team, but I don't have a problem with them and would rather lose to the National Champion than a Semi-Finalist.

I don't like the way UCLA plays. I never have, and I'd be surprised if I ever do. I will NEVER root for them to win. I see your point about losing to the eventual champion, and I'm sure lots of people agree with that, but I'm not really a fan of trying to justify (or lessen) a loss like that. A loss is a loss, especially when the loser is out of the tournament. It's not less of a loss because the team that beats you goes on to win.

runner girl wrote: It's not less of a loss because the team that beats you goes on to win.

I guess that is true once you are into the quarters or later, every team that gets there is pretty darn good. But I do believe there is a difference between losing to a champion and an also-ran.

Chiefer, you probably are right about the emotions. I have been gone from Portland for 4 years now and have not been able to see very many games, I pretty much follow the team here and what I can occasionally see online (or TV if we get that far) or the few games I get to see live. When I first started following UP women's soccer Notre Dame was kind of our rival, and I guess I didn't really want to see them win. I just haven't seen UCLA play much so I am not as emotionally involved as many of the other fans on this site.

Purplegeezer, I want to be careful in what I say and how I say it because I don't want to be coming across as too critical, especially coming soon after UCLA's 7th consecutive college cup loss at either the semi finals or finals, (of course, one of those coming from you guys.) But regarding that, I don't know how much more can be tolerated by the administration. If you are pleased just to be there, well then UCLA, is doing a great job and I know that it is remarkable to get there, 8 out of the last 10 years. I know the Pilot Nation would have probably built the gallows a long time ago given the same scenario. You may recall, USC's prvious coach took his team to the second round before losing and then he was fired. With the then, current group and recurits that he recruited, the next coach won a national championship. It does take talent, to be sure but when you get to the final four it takes, you know what. Enough said.

I think this year's team was fortunate to get to where it got and with whom it had, talent wise. It is obvious to non soccer people that I know who will make comments that the style of play of a Portland or Stanford is superior and it becomes obvious when you do get to the final four, you had better know how to play as a team and not just two or three players trying to connect. UCLA was fortunate to have some key players including a tandem players, like Cheney and Leroux. Cheney was really a catalyst for distributing this year and was the glue that held the offense together. I don't know the incoming recruits but I don't see anyone filling the role that she did and that could spell trouble for scoring production. Defensively, in my opinion, they will be a mess. The combination of the '08 combo of Hardy and Cook were tough to beat as they were the fastest players on the team as central defenders. This year they lost a step in the back and they will lose an outside back and their central defender, Cook, who was probably the most underrated of all of them. Barnes will remain but with no experience help on the back line. Wright will be the mainstay at holding but other than those players they have little help from the '09 class. The best of the attackers was Cline who was under utilized. the other MF was overrated, lazy and had no guts. The rest of the freshman class would not touch the field at Portland. The GK did a good job kicking the ball down the field, but they're going to be in trouble with her over the long run and with no real answers in sight.

I don't know how careful I was but to answer you question, the 2010 class better be a good one or they can say good night and dont leave the light on.

chiefer wrote:... If you are pleased just to be there, well then UCLA, is doing a great job and I know that it is remarkable to get there, 8 out of the last 10 years. I know the Pilot Nation would have probably built the gallows a long time ago given the same scenario. ...

Chiefer, I agree with just about all of the rest of what you posted, but the one thing I don't think I agree on is the "gallows" statement. Something I have been laughing to myself about is how critical the Stanford fans have been of their coaching this year. I mean, come on, a team that finishes 25-1 and gets to the championship game? And, I've seen a lot of heavy criticism by some UNC fans of their team. I mean, ? I think the PilotNation posters, for whatever reason, have a better sense of how hard it is for a team to win the championship and of the struggles some of the players have to go through what with school, national team commitments, etc. Maybe it's just the Northwest "softer" culture, but maybe also it explains why the Pilots' fans have so much love for the team and the program. They're more forgiving and compassionate than a lot of teams' fans.

On the other hand, I do wonder whether there's something in Jill that comes short of what's needed. I know that the younger players who have played for her on youth national teams really like her -- I know one of them, so I have a direct sense of this. But, maybe there's something missing in terms of what it takes lead a team to a national championship? If I were to make a guess, it's too much of an orientation towards method and not enough willingness to encourage creativity.

Today's result...with UNC winning its 20th Cup makes the "2nd Tier" comment look even more ridiculous!! Add-in the recent wins
they had in 2006, 2008.......

Soooo WHO????...other than the Tar Heels....are in the 1st Tier?????

GO PILOTS!!!

AspenPilot wrote:Stanford got robbed on both of their goals. My dad and I were right by the goals that Stanford were shooting on and it was apparent that the referee's wanted UNC to win this game.

don't think so.

The first "goal" had Stanford players actively playing the ball while offsides. One player almost connected with the ball. That's almost the definition of active ofsides. had the player pulled up and clearly taken herself out of the play, then I could see you point, but no effort was made.

A.R. 11.2.2.c. May a player in an offside position be penalized for being offside
on a shot by a teammate? RULING: Only if the referee judges that the player
in the offside position is interfering with play or an opponent, or is gaining an
advantage by being in that offside position at the moment the ball is played.

It sure looked to me that by trying to make a play for the ball, the Stanford player was interfering. All you have to do is distract the keeper.


The second "goal" was also offsides, I think, though just barely.
To tell you the truth, I think the linesman was too far up the field to make the call made.
At any rate, there were worse calls made both ways in the game.

chiefer wrote:Purplegeezer, I want to be careful in what I say and how I say it because I don't want to be coming across as too critical, especially coming soon after UCLA's 7th consecutive college cup loss at either the semi finals or finals, (of course, one of those coming from you guys.) But regarding that, I don't know how much more can be tolerated by the administration. If you are pleased just to be there, well then UCLA, is doing a great job and I know that it is remarkable to get there, 8 out of the last 10 years. I know the Pilot Nation would have probably built the gallows a long time ago given the same scenario. You may recall, USC's prvious coach took his team to the second round before losing and then he was fired. With the then, current group and recurits that he recruited, the next coach won a national championship. It does take talent, to be sure but when you get to the final four it takes, you know what. Enough said.

The USC question is still whether Millinder could have won with the kids he recruited and whether Ali can do any better in the long run. Everyone recognized that AROD's class was special, and he wasn't given a chance to take them anywhere. Most players mature their junior years or so. Millinder never saw that. So far, the fewer of Milinder's kids and the more of Ali's, the worse USC has done. Next year the stamp on the team will be entirely his. This will be his true test. If the USC A.D. thought AROD's class would take them to the Championship with the right coach and made the switch for that reason, he's a genius. If he was trying to build a long term program, the jury is still out.

Be careful what you wish for in thinking about a replacement for Jill. The National team connections are still a powerful recruiting tool, and the next coach won't have that. Who do you think will do better if she's gone? I just don't see prospects out there. Maybe Petrucelli is bored with Texas. Do you think he would be an improvement?

I'm kind of with UPSF on the Gallows thing. UP went to the College Cup eight times before Clive won it. They even missed the tournament altogether a couple years in between. Each year, UP fans loved it MORE, not less, and I think that's still true for the current coach and fans. Attendance gets better every year. it was over 45K this year.

Part of it is that the focus is on the journey. The teams are fun to watch.

While I don't think any good player (or fan) should be satisfied with not winning it all, that's not the only thing there is. Playing well, playing creative soccer, and getting better are rewards also, as is watching players grow as people.

I am not so much result-oriented as teaching-orientated. If it becomes all about winning, all you get is frustrated when you lose. I can’t say results were secondary, but they were kind of linked up with everything else. I think you always look to the next game – how are we going to make it better, not perfect, but nearer perfect? I get a lot out of getting players to improve their game but also develop as people. I think the two things can be connected.

.....

Winning is not everything, in fact it is just something, but the ambition, the want to do as well as you can is important, and that has to be based on an idea of what real success is. Young fans, young players who turn out for their schools, can take that sort of thing into their everyday lives. Why should anyone be satisfied by second best? Again, there is nothing wrong with coming in second, but that shouldn’t stop you from trying to be first or even a better second. ~ Clive Charles.

[quote="Purplegeezer"]

"I'm kind of with UPSF on the Gallows thing. UP went to the College Cup eight times before Clive won it. They even missed the tournament altogether a couple years in between. Each year, UP fans loved it MORE, not less, and I think that's still true for the current coach and fans. Attendance gets better every year. it was over 45K this year.

Part of it is that the focus is on the journey. The teams are fun to watch.

While I don't think any good player (or fan) should be satisfied with not winning it all, that's not the only thing there is. Playing well, playing creative soccer, and getting better are rewards also, as is watching players grow as people."

These are all really great points, and I also definitely agree with UPSF. After all, UP has "only" made it to the quarters the last 3 years, which would seem to give us more reason to want to send the coaches to the gallows than UCLA fans. The reason you won't hear that here, I think, is that UP fans appreciate the quality of the people in the program and, as Geezer said, how much fun the team is to watch play. Win or lose, we tend to fall in love with our team, and that includes both players and coaches. It is absolutely true that, while winning is the ultimate goal, it is not everything. If you can't get enjoyment from a team that doesn't win the national championship every year, there is a problem somewhere, and the problem may not be with the team.

Being relatively new to following women's soccer, I was interested to hear the USC history. I think coaching longevity and stability is vitally important in a program and is one of the reasons UP does so well. We see that here in spades with two of the Syracuse U. programs, football and basketball. Football has gone through several coaching changes in the past few years (I really think we have the right guy now), and the team has been awful, whereas Jim Boeheim played basketball here, was assistant coach here, and has been head coach forever. I am certain he is not the absolute best coach and/or recruiter in the country, but the program has been consistently good for a very long time, and we have a national championship. Without really knowing any details or reasons, I would wager USC made a mistake. I think you need to get a coach who will commit to the long term (NOT Larry Brown, for ex.), and give him/her at least 10 years to learn and build a program. Note I said learn. If a school hires a good long-term man like Garrett and gives him time, it will be rewarded in the long run, because a good man will learn as he goes. I feel VERY confident that if there is something that needs to be done differently to get past the quarters as far as preparing the team, a good coach like Garrett will find it.

Be careful what you wish for in thinking about a replacement for Jill. The National team connections are still a powerful recruiting tool, and the next coach won't have that. Who do you think will do better if she's gone? I just don't see prospects out there. Maybe Petrucelli is bored with Texas. Do you think he would be an improvement?

Geezer: This is the part I wanted to be very careful about and my comments are not to be a personal indictmentof the present regime. But you have asked an interesting question. Here's my answer that I would like for you to consider and then I would like to hear your comments. Picture, for a moment if you can, UCLA, a quality academic school; Southern California weather and beaches; storied soccer program; tons of California recruits;"swimming pools, movie stars" (I think you're old enough to remember the BH) and Garret Smith, eg., as its new coach. How long?....my answer.....not very

Chiefer - You can't have him!!

chiefer wrote:
Geezer: This is the part I wanted to be very careful about and my comments are not to be a personal indictmentof the present regime. But you have asked an interesting question. Here's my answer that I would like for you to consider and then I would like to hear your comments. Picture, for a moment if you can, UCLA, a quality academic school; Southern California weather and beaches; storied soccer program; tons of California recruits;"swimming pools, movie stars" (I think you're old enough to remember the BH) and Garret Smith, eg., as its new coach. How long?....my answer.....not very

Ha ha . My first reaction --

But if you get rid of Jillian to court Garrett you might be disappointed. Sure you can pay him more money. What else?

Right after the College Cup of 1995, UConn, then considered to be one of the top 2 programs in the country, courted Clive. He even flew to Connecticut right after the Cup. Here's what he said about that.

I’ve had chances to coach at bigger schools and I can’t say I wasn’t tempted because it meant a bigger office, prestige, better facilities and a much bigger budget. But I didn’t really want to leave. I think it’s easier to leave a place that was already established when you went there. But, after building the place yourself, it’s tough to leave. It is a good place for me to be and give a little back. I owe a lot to the game, everything really. I will never be able to repay what it’s given me, but Portland has been a good place to give what I can.

Garrett's put as much of himself into the program here as Clive. He's actually been WITH the program quite a bit longer, as a player in one of Clive's first teams, assistant, and now head coach, and he ( Along with Bill Irwin) was with Clive at every step in that journey. When Bill retires, the mantle of Director of both programs is surely his if he wants it (he now holds the title of Associate Director of both programs). Soccer is The sport here at Portland. I know it's hard to imagine, but it is the focus of the athletic department and the school administration here. It's not a program tucked away in a track facility that exists for Title IX reasons. The Clive Charles Soccer Complex is the first thing you see when you drive onto the campus. He has a President of the University that is a fan and attends all the games. He has an AD that freely admits his "supervision" of the program is to ask Garrett what needs and then to try to figure out how to get it for him and cheer him on, and to promote the program as a keystone to the whole athletic effort. His teams regularly play in front of crowds of 3-5 thousand fans who love what he's doing - the best in the Nation. In fact, current crowds average more than double anything Clive ever saw and growing, even since the Championship year of 2005. I think everyone here feels pretty fortunate he's here. His successes aren't taken for granted, nor are the programs shortfalls from year to year seen as failures.

Every person Garrett works with has taken the same or similar course.

And he's running his program out of a facility that's second to none in the soccer world. The next few years growth of the University sport facilities includes even more fields, a modest stadium size increase, and more facilities upgrades as the economy and donors allow.

He's still closely tied with Clive's old club program that I'm sure provides him with a fair supplement to the University pay.


I can't say Garrett would never leave. Nobody can guarantee that.
But UCLA had better come up with more than a paycheck to lure him away. a demonstrated commitment to soccer would be needed, I would think. Try building a soccer- only stadium, showing him a plan for promoting soccer as the (or at least a) premier sport at UCLA and complete autonomy. Then you'd better make the contract long term. After firing Jill with her success, I'm not so sure UCLA could convince him they are willing to go through the struggles of building a championship program his way.

You might have a better shot with Anson, or if you did the things I outlined, you might help Jill finally get her Cup.

Geezer: You have provided a very comprehensive outline as to the history and make-up of your coach and the building of the program. Without specifically answering my question, you answered it. Good luck to the Pilots next year. I have enjoyed the conversation.

I am reminded of August of 1998, when the Oregonian reported that a school (probably an ACC rival of UNC) was vigorously pursuing Coach Charles with a big-dollar offer to come coach their squad.

The then-President Father Tyson addressed the subject head-on at the "incoming freshmen/parents speech" in the arena; to paraphrase, he said the school would never get into a bidding war over any coach's salary and that if Coach felt he needed to leave UP would wish him good luck and part on friendly terms.

(An aside: with Fr. T. now running the order in Indiana, what is the thinnking in the CSC house regarding the millions of dollars being coughed up in the Weis-buyout-replacement affair . . . . . )

*******************************

One more thought with regard to the original intent of this thread: watching the televised action from College Station just made me FEEL cold . . . . . it was so much nicer with the Indian Summer weather we enjoyed at the '05 Cup . . . .

slick wrote:
(An aside: with Fr. T. now running the order in Indiana, what is the thinnking in the CSC house regarding the millions of dollars being coughed up in the Weis-buyout-replacement affair . . . . . )

*******************************

Buyout? That's pocket change compared to the bankruptcy of Jesuits Northwest over sexual abuse cases. Gonzaga has done everything it can to separate itself from Jesuits Northwest so that no one comes after their $. Anyway, ND can do whatever they want with their football coach as long as we beat them in women's futbol...

I'll add only one thing to what the Geez said about Garrett and his ties here. We Pilots fans don't talk about it much, because we don't want to dishonor Clive, but the last couple of years of Clive's life, as he was becoming weaker, Garrett was taking on more and more of the heading up of the women's program. And, Garrett for a number of years before Clive died was the leg work person for the recruiting. Clive obviously was the big attraction for recruiting purposes, but Garrett found and brought the girls to see him. Garrett, to his present credit, always has given Clive all of the credit and accolades for the first national championship, but those who know how hard the last period of Clive's life was for him know that Garrett did a lot of the coaching.

Clive's vision was to build a better and better and better program, bit by bit and piece by piece. Garrett buys into that and also sees it as part of the vision of Portland ultimately being at the very top for a very long time. I think he wants to be the guy who is here for the long term, working to bring the vision to reality.

With that, I think there is a very deep bond that is likely to hold him here possibly even for the rest of his coaching career.

On the other hand, there may be other good coaches who would go to UCLA. But, I think the Geez's question is right on. Who else is out there, much less willing to take on the job, that can exceed what Jill's done? As the data show, there are only a very few coaches that have proved themselves capable of maintaining a program at the very top level over a long period of time: and they're at North Carolina, Notre Dame, Portland, and Santa Clara, and after those at Florida State and maybe at Stanford (which looks likely, but hasn't been at the top long enough to meet the "long period of time" standard). I think in all those cases, the coaches have been the key. So, either UCLA would have to get one of those coaches, which seems unlikely, or they're taking a gamble that's likely to be a losing proposition.

Plus Garrett and his wife have three daughtrers who are stilo school-age, I think. Major lifestyle change to move a family from Portland to LA.

Hope it never happens!

Purplegeezer wrote:
But UCLA had better come up with more than a paycheck to lure him away. a demonstrated commitment to soccer would be needed, I would think. Try building a soccer- only stadium, showing him a plan for promoting soccer as the (or at least a) premier sport at UCLA and complete autonomy.

I would suggest that the scheduling of this year's quarterfinal playoff game on the same evening as the USC/UCLA football game is not a positive indication of the UCLA athletic department's commitment to supporting their women's soccer program.

Purplegeezer we can agree to disagree then. Because that first goal was in the same area and had the same look of the goal that Sinclair scored in 2005. The second goal was close but what hurt was the linesman was out of the play.

Either way not trying to make a case for Stanford just sharing thoughts. I purchased tickets before the tournament in hopes of having the Pilots come with. Unfortunately that didn't happen, but it was still fun to experience a Final 4.

Next stop North Carolina 2010.

AspenPilot wrote:Purplegeezer we can agree to disagree then. Because that first goal was in the same area and had the same look of the goal that Sinclair scored in 2005. The second goal was close but what hurt was the linesman was out of the play.

Here's shots of both of Sinclair's goals from 2005

The first goal,couldn't possibly be the one you refer to, because Christine had only a defender and the keeper between her and the goal. Here is just as she's turning to fire.


And the score with nobody else in the frame


The second shot couldn't be it, either, since the shot shows a keeper and a defender on the goal line (far right):
The score went in between that defender and the post.





Just in case you were refering to Christine's goals from 2002, here's shots of those, too.

First, her shot from the left wing:



Then a shot of SCU players and Erin Misaki. she is onside:
remember, this is a half second after the shot


On cross for the winning goal, shot of the Keeper and SCU player (upper left on frame) who hold everyone onside. Note that both are below the 6 yard line and everyone else is above it. Also, the player marking Kristen Moore slid and is right on the goal line out of frame.



You can see it all in motion on this youtube clip:




This was, of course, just a blatant excuse to post the clip of those goals once more

Next stop North Carolina 2010.

I must say that I'm not terribly excited about our chances in the 2010 College Cup. I say this because the Tarheels seem to have a lock on the championship trophey when it is played at their backyard stadium in Cary, NC. The C.C. has been played in Cary four times since 2003 and Carolina has won it on three of those occasions. The Heels weren't successful when the champs were held at A&M in '05 and '07.

Poopdeck Pappy wrote:

Next stop North Carolina 2010.

I must say that I'm not terribly excited about our chances in the 2010 College Cup. I say this because the Tarheels seem to have a lock on the championship trophey when it is played at their backyard stadium in Cary, NC. The C.C. has been played in Cary four times since 2003 and Carolina has won it on three of those occasions. The Heels weren't successful when the champs were held at A&M in '05 and '07.

They lost in Cary to ND in 2004. Before that, they sat in the stands and watched Portland and Notre Dame battle it out for the championship in 1995

What could be sweeter than beating them at their home, or better yet, having them in the stands again.

Besides, they might be a goal worse and High Point might be a goal better next year.

I hope there are many "next stops" before Cary, N.C. Like all the home games I plan to see at Merlo, and maybe a road match or two, and even the spring scrimmages. Let's take it one game at a time, even tho the next game is much too far away.