Pilots 1 PSU 0

Pilots dominated but only managed the one goal.

Erin Dees (FR) played all 90 minutes in goal. Not sure if she has outplayed Hailee in practice but she got the start. Haille was active in warm ups so did not appear to be hurt. Erin did nothing wrong but Michelle Olivier could have played in goal and not been troubled.

Back four was as expected. Jessica, Cloee, Michelle and Elli. Both outside backs got forward to good effect. MO and CC were strong and composed and played the ball out well. CC had a chance with her head froma corner that was a clean header that she only glanced when she had a chance to knock it in. Not a serious examination of the defense tonight.

Michelle Cruz started at right mid and played for 60 minutes. Looked useful. Keelin and Sophie played the middle. Typical strong games from them. Keelin had three shots on goal int he game: all from distance. I am very happy to see her having a go from outside. Three in one game seems like more than she had all season. And the goal came from one which she belted on goal, keeper blocked but could not gather it in and Sophie was following up and popped the rebound in. Kendall played on the left and also looked OK. Taylor Brooke came on for Cruz and was very lively.

Dani was up front for an hour; think she may have tweaked somethng because she was not running after the game. Micaela Capelle finished the game off; and had a promising time. Hallie K was the other forward. Held the ball up well. Had a good header chance from a corner late on but could not get it on target.

Pilots had five players: Kendra, Emma Nelson, Ellen Parker, Amanda Frisbie and Kyllie Leffler not dressed for the game.

More thoughts later

There were 27 shots for the Pilots, and maybe a half dozen were the long range, non-threatening variety. When the Pilots shoot from distance they do it purposefully. On the other end I think the two PSU shots may have been the only two times they put together a cohesive attack. That's as much possession as I've ever seen from the Pilots.

Keelin and Sophie seemed to switch off between attacking and holding mid. Both played both positions well and I think I like this arrangement. Capelle got off a shot with some nice movement on it and set up some good chances.

Not a lot to say about the defense (I mean that in a good way) except that I'm glad Cloee is back healthy.

I'll say more about the defense. I think the Pilots' focus in this game was defense and I thought they defended very well. Yes, Keelin went forward some, as did Ellie and Jessica. But, overall, I think they were determined not to give Portland State any decent shots and they succeeded admirably.

Chloe is a bear in the air. She doesn't just head the ball, she heads it with power. The group of Chloe, Michelle, Keelin, and Sophie absolutely dominated the air.

Overall, although I would have liked more goals, my interest was in seeing the defense. It was rock solid and made me feel better about our long term chances than any defending I've seen in quite a while. Great job, team!

The offense looked rusty.

Just missing on a lot of chances, players passing into spaces the recipient didn't expect, errant shots and from too far outside. there were things that looked good, but it was almost like they were trying too hard. PSU bunkered a bit, but a well honed UP can make that not so much a problem.

Still, PSU had no credible shots. The Defense looked VERY good, even when UP was pushing well forward.

Erin Dees has no idea what it is to be a D! keeper yet. She really had nothing to do.

Still, I commend PSU for having a plan to stay in the game with UP that I'm sure they are happy with at the end of the night. Coach Schott is doing a great job with that team. I fully expect them to do very well in the Big Sky and perhaps win their conference.

Keelin and Sophie really stepped up on the scoring sequence and showed what team leadership is about.

The Merlo pitch looked flawless and smooth as a pool table. The sunset was gorgeous peach and purple. But the action on the field didn't deliver the resounding win the Pilots faithful had predicted and expected. (See other threads for wildly optimistic estimates of when first goal would be scored.) The game was a rout except in terms of the final score.

Yet this game left Pilot fans in Section B muttering and shaking their heads. Late in the game one fan yelled, "C'mon, offense, show us what you've got!" Answer: just enough. Safe possession play with the Pilot forwards sending the ball back to the mids back to the defenders and up and back or across and back again did not satisfy the crowd's goal lust. The spacing and passing was off just enough, and the Vikigs defense just pesky enough, that the shots did not hit home. Patience, Grasshopper! One game doesn't make a season, and the lack of finishing touches on many fine chances was not fatal -- a win is a win is a shutout is good.

PSU has to feel great about this one. The Vikings had no chance whatsoever to score and could hardly string three passes together. Can they spell "dispossessed"? Their favorite defensive move was kicking the ball deep into the stands to let time run down. But they held off the vaunted Pilots for 75 minutes and allowed just the one goal. Kudos to the overworked keeper, Rachel Jarvis from Lake Oswego -- well done. Will other teams try the Vikings' tactics of jamming 8 or 9 or 10 players into the box, grabbing jerseys and getting very physical (ref was lost in space on many non-calls)? Yeah, likely. UP will have to find ways to beat the bunker defense. PSU was not pretty but it was almost nil-nil effective. Good luck to them in every game from now on.

We saw three freshmen play and one pair of subs go in for the Pilots, so questions remain. The bench looks longer than ever with 21 game-ready and 5 recuperating in warmups. Lots of worthy players who would have earned game time in a less-close contest last year did not play. The season is on. May it unfold with exceptional beauty.

I agree that the defense was excellent. They won everything in the air, kept their shape, and looked calm and composed on the ball.

I have two concerns after watching last night's match and I hope both prove unwarranted as the season goes along.

First, there was lots of passing the ball around looking for opportunities to break into the packed in defense, but there didn't seem to be anyone trying to force those opportunities. Rarely did a Pilot take on a defender and try to get into a dangerous position or force someone else on the defense out of position to cover up. There were very few dangerous forward runs off the ball. Lots of probing but little thrust.

Second, I didn't see a lot of evidence of team speed up front and I wonder if this will be a problem this year without an Enyeart/Rapinoe kind of game-changer. The key players in the middle (Danielle, Hallie, Sophie, and Keelin) are all great possession players but maybe they don't have the quick first step or breakaway speed to create chances quickly. It seems like when we have lost against UCLA/Stanford over the last few years, it was the brilliantly creative and lightning fast player on the other team (e.g., O'Hara, Press, DiMartino) who has created the opening that decided the match. As good as this Pilot team is (or should be), that might be a weakness.

I understand many of the concerns voiced here, but overall think it's too soon to know if any of them are really problems. We have been spoilt and sometimes lose perspective. The person sitting next to me last night was complaining about the problem the Pilots had scoring last season: they scored 83 goals last season. I hope we have same problem this year.

Pilots play a apatient possession oriented game. They are not a long ball team. This requires finesse and touch and coordination. My experience over several years is that it takes time for that to come together under game conditions. Some of the final touch was missing last night.

PSU played a conservative game: with lots of people back and very little attacking effort. Pilots will have to get used to that again in many games.

I would have liked to see some more effort at running at people rather than passing back and around but this is a matter of degree, because Jessica and Elli and Kendall and Michelle C all showed some of that.

I think the question of who plays up front with Dani is still very open. Remembering the "rule" on this site about not dissing players let me say that I like Hallie and hope that she shows the improvement year-over-year that she did last season. Did not see that last night. Amanda F was not fit ti play; Micaela C had a run out - too soon to know what she is capable of; and there is the option of playing Sophie there, depending on what some of the midfield options are. Ellen Parker was not fit last night. If she is hot at attacking mid them maybe Sophie moves up front.

Speed is more of a weapon if you are breaking against a team that has committed players forward. If there are 9 players back already pace is not the same weapon because there is no space to run into. Under those circumstances it's the creative interplay and electric first steps that get you the opening.

Wish the game tomorrow was at Merlo so we could take another look.

One more thought: Spain won the world cup with a lot of 1-0 wins; and a patient approach to possession. If the back five of Jess, MichO, Cloee and Dani; with Keelin on guard, are as tough as we hope they are ity may be that Pilots don't need to score a lot of goals. We'll all be nervous wrecks!

Interesting, SoreKnees. The need for team speed up front was something that stood out to me last night, too. Micaela Capelle had flashes that she might be that kind of player.

Just a couple of quick reflections from the game:

1. I think we won every header in the first half. Seriously.
2. PSU's keeper was big for them in goal last night. There were many chances we put on frame (14 out of 27) where she did not allow the rebound despite Foxhoven crashing the frame. The goal came on a short rebound that Sophie was in perfect position for.
3. Any one of us armchair coaches could have posted the shutout in goal. Not to take away anything Erin did, but we maintained so much possession that she could have stopped picking grass, stood up, walked over to the Chiles Center to shoot a few layups, and come back without anyone notcing. PSU had about 90 seconds of possession in their attacking third.
4. Great point HR on Spain winning many matches 1-0. This all counts the same in the RPI.

My observations of last night's game seem to be a little different than those posted. IMHO, I saw the Vikings do just what they did against Concordia...defense only with a disorganized attempt at offense. The Pilots did what they did last year against this caliber of team, they practiced some plays for future games. I don't believe that this game was in doubt at any time and I also know that Garrett is not only a coach, but a teacher of the game. When I saw several times last year that a certain player was wide open for a shot but didn't take it, I asked them after the game why. The answer was that it wasn't what Garrett had asked them to do. A lot of praise was given to a player last year when she scored her first goal, but afterward she apologized to her teammates because it was an accident...it was supposed to be another's shot. What they practiced last night was misdirection. It still needs work, but I think they will have it down pat by the SMU game. Again, this is just IMHO ramblings.

Passion

Your ramblings are just as valid as anything the rest of us have to say. It's not like we know what we're talking about!

Gorilla

Fair comments. Some of the Pilots shots were not as deadly as they might have been but the PSU keeper was as busy as Erin Dees wasn't.

It will be interesting to see if Garrett does indeed stay with UP’s patient/possession oriented style of play against teams that rely more on craftiness, speed, and/or physical play (i.e. Penn St, Texas A&M, Cal, and Stanford).

Based on what I observed in 2008 against Stanford, and last year against Santa Clara and UCLA; I expect Garrett will make some adjustments to deal with these kind of teams.

Couldn't watch the game (stepdaughter's wedding, my wife made me go), so thanks for all the writeups.

Opinions from afar - I thought there were some very insightful thoughts on this thread re. speed up front. I thought Michelle was really missed vs UCLA last year mostly because of the loss of her speed up front. As was said above, speed isn't so important when the other team is bunkered in, but it can be crucial when they have the ball in our defensive third and we get the chance to break out, which was often the situation in that UCLA game. Another way of looking at it is, speed becomes more important as the quality of the opponent rises, because we will presumably be playing more of the game in our defensive end and the field will becomes more spread.

Also - I seem to remember from past posts that Garrett stresses defense early, offense later, plus the offense UP plays is complicated and takes time to get going. So, hopefully, not to worry about just scoring one goal.

Well, yeah but it was a worry UNTIL we scored that one goal.

If you want to watch the game, it's up online at PortlandPilots.com and the video quality seemed pretty good when I watched it this morning. It will be a nice tool for us fans to see exactly what was going on and where the shots were really coming from.

http://mobile.stretchinternet.com/listEvents.htm?broadcastType=0&clientID=148

At least that's the link for apple mobile devices.

<edit> for most PC's the link is http://client.stretchinternet.com/client/up.portal#
go to On Demand.

The score is around 1:37 of the video. Count the passes on the next Pilot possesion after the score. I counted 38 passes, then. Viking touch, then 6 more, another Viking touch and 6 more after that. I may have missed one, though.

Geezaldinho,

I don't understand your comment, "The score is around 1:37 of the video."

The video I see ON DEMAND is the entire match. That would be about 75 minutes into the game.

[EDIT: I bet you mean one hour, thirty-seven minutes. I thought you meant one minute, thirty-seven seconds.]

I just want to see the goal. I either was looking away when it happened or the camera missed part of it, because all I saw was Sophie running into the net with the ball bouncing around in the corner of the net.

[EDIT: Is there a way to see a video of the goal? I thought goals would be available ON DEMAND after games.]

Great comments, fellow Pilot fans. I don't have much to add, but if the team needs speed and quickness, I sure saw it from the freshman sub from Gresham, Micaela Capelle. She may need more time working together with her teammates, but wow...I thought she was a whirling dervish out there.

FANatic wrote:Geezaldinho,

I don't understand your comment, "The score is around 1:37 of the video."

The video I see ON DEMAND is the entire match. That would be about 75 minutes into it.

I just want to see the goal. I either was looking away when it happened or the camera missed part of it, because all I saw was Sophie running into the net with the ball bouncing around in the corner of the net

I watched it on my iPad, which uses it's own video player. That player shows the length of the entire broadcast. ( a bit over 2 hrs.), not just the game clock. It has the advantage that you can scroll anywhere in the broadcast to view it. When I watch on my desktop machine, I can't figure out how to pan ahead.

The goal was somewhere in the 75th minute if you can figure out how to get there. It's there, but if you blink you will miss it. (see below)

The video also looks better on the iPad, I think. On a 20" screen it looks fuzzy, and if you use the default viewer window, it seems too small. When you view on the iPad, it's about 9"x7", which is just right for the video resolution. It also looked remarkably good on my iPhone size screen when I view it there.

Another advantage is the ability to click one button on the iPad or iPhone and the video will back up 30 seconds for replay. You can watch the play over and over.

The broadcast was shot a bit too tight sometimes for soccer, so some plays were missed. It's always a bit hard with only one camera a nd no replay, but around the goal, a wider shot might be better.

This was still miles above the broadcasts just a couple years ago. They cut in and out and were unwatchable sometimes.

having waited until now to remark on the girls first game, here are my impressons, an they are not what you may think.

my first impression was when i walked into merlo an saw this tall, pretty slender short haired blond hair player warming up. i thought i was looking at megan rapinoe all over again. it was sophie!! am i the only one who thinks sophie has lost a pretty significant amount of weight?? i've always associated sophie with her build, her strength. she looks absolutely lithe now!! an that goes for keelin too!! mayb its the short hair.

as for the play, i am disappointed our girls didnt score more, but after reading this thread an early season philosophy im ok with it. i thought cruz had a little bit of freshman jitters/trying to fit in nerves...that's not a knock.
i loved the ease that michaela came in an fit in, and no, i dont say that because she was my "most interested in seeing". she simply 'blended in'. i also loved that way taylor came into the game provided the team with a burst of speed an explosion some here have wondered if that is what this team needs. if it is, taylor is our answer. i think she may be the fastest player we have ever had here on the bluff

I am in agreement with fozzie. 1-0 games may be fine against Portland State but with any good caliber team can change into a 1-1 game with just ONE great shot or one defensive mishap. You need to look at the players you have on the roster and create some team speed up front that can run at the oppositions defense and beat them off the ball, run without the ball and then make the connection (which will happen with more time together)

In MOHO, we need team speed up front or we will be in for a long season!

No disrespect Fozzie, but I'm pretty sure Michelle Enyeart was and still is the fastest player ever.

Purple Passion wrote:

"When I saw (several times) last year that a certain player was wide open for a shot but didn't take it, I asked them after the game why? The answer ws that it wasn't what Garrett had asked them to do. A lot of praise was given to a player when she scored her first goal, but afterward she apologized to her teammates because it was an accident... it was supposed to be another's shot."

Wow.

I can't imagine Christine Sinclair or Megan Rapino apologizing to their teammates after scoring a goal after an opportunity presented itself. I simply can't. Christine and Megan are living proof of the benifits of crafty, intuitive, and aggressive soccer play.

The coaching staff would be wise to promote that style of play and trust their player's ability to make decisions using their own minds.

Micro-management is way over-rated.

Uncle John wrote:Purple Passion wrote:

"When I saw (several times) last year that a certain player was wide open for a shot but didn't take it, I asked them after the game why? The answer ws that it wasn't what Garrett had asked them to do. A lot of praise was given to a player when she scored her first goal, but afterward she apologized to her teammates because it was an accident... it was supposed to be another's shot."

Wow.

I can't imagine Christine Sinclair or Megan Rapino apologizing to their teammates after scoring a goal after an opportunity presented itself. I simply can't. Christine and Megan are living proof of the benifits of crafty, intuitive, and aggressive soccer play.

The coaching staff would be wise to promote that style of play and trust their player's ability to make decisions using their own minds.

Micro-management is way over-rated.

Actually, Christine passed up a lot of shots if someone else was open. Go back to 2005 erticles and see how often the term "unselfish" was used.

Right you are Geez... It would have been scary to see what Christine's goal tally would have been if she forced shots every chance she got, not that it necessarily would have translated to more wins...

My night mostly consisted of me trying to get video of the onslaught of goals I was expecting. I did not get many photos because of this fact.

I thought I got video of the goal but when I got home I realized somehow my camera setting at the time had switched. Instead I just got a series of blurry photos.





Better luck next time. Proud of my shot of Danielle though.

Geezaldinho wrote:Well, yeah but it was a worry UNTIL we scored that one goal.

If you want to watch the game, it's up online at PortlandPilots.com and the video quality seemed pretty good when I watched it this morning. It will be a nice tool for us fans to see exactly what was going on and where the shots were really coming from.

http://mobile.stretchinternet.com/listEvents.htm?broadcastType=0&clientID=148

At least that's the link for apple mobile devices.

<edit> for most PC's the link is http://client.stretchinternet.com/client/up.portal#
go to On Demand.

The score is around 1:37 of the video. Count the passes on the next Pilot possesion after the score. I counted 38 passes, then. Viking touch, then 6 more, another Viking touch and 6 more after that. I may have missed one, though.

GREAT!! I just got back from Chicago and can watch the game tomorrow. Thanks for the lead. Do you think the game will stay up for a while?

I didn't realize the goal came so late. Must have been a bit frustrating, with all that possession and no goals.

Disappointed there's no video tonight, but at least I can watch gametracker (Whoopee)