Stanford - Notre Dame

Notre Dame is taking it to Stanford.

They have unsettled the Stanford back line and are winning the midfield. Press has been taken out of it, and Notre Dame has had 4-5. Good chances and a post to one post shot by Verloo.

Stanford is finding out that getting to the finals is different than winning it.

It still could go either way.

ND 1 nill in 67'. I didn't expect them to do much in the tourney after their loss in the Big East playoff.

Contests to Notre Dame. They showed they could play the possession game as well as Stanford, and won the midfield to boot. The Stanford back line look slow and disorganized.

If not for the Stanford keeper it could have been 6-0

Press was a non- factor in the game.

I was expecting a beautiful possession game from Stanford, but it seemed like one out of 5 passes was to no one, or right to a blue shirt. Were they rattled by the pressure, the mid-30s temperature? They were resorting to long balls in the first 20 minutes. When Press had it, she seemed always determined to muddle through with her footwork, which wasn't working against these defenders, and she missed some teammates she could have fed it off to.

Can someone who watched them Friday tell us if they looked a lot better then?

Only their keeper played brilliantly today.

I think the Pilots could have done better than that.

Notre Dame lost to UCLA and UConn, tied Georgetown and UConn. I guess they just had a few off days in the regular season. Sure looked good this weekend.

Stanford was brilliant Friday. The trophy isn't handed out on Friday.

I agree about Press. I have this repeated picture of her doing happy feet moves in front of a defender hoping she would fall down, I guess.

In my opion, Notre Dame had a brilliant game plan as to how they were going to neutralize Standfords strenghts and they suceeded. Game... Notre Dame!

And I agree withh DWM.. Stanfords freshman goalkeeper played brilliantly or the score would have been at least 3 or 4-0.

Great play by ND's superstar Henderson to break down the defense and set up the winner (I really couldn't resist that).

It sure seemed like Stanford's central D's were unable to control the ND forwards. They both looked slow to me. I thought Verloo looked great Friday, but she got beat a LOT today, and also lost the ball under pressure a few times. I wonder if she isn't playing out of position there and shouldn't maybe be playing up more.

It was a very entertaining game. I REALLY wish the Pilots had been playing. From what I saw this weekend, I would say that UP, Notre Dame and Stanford are the class teams of this years field.

fan from afar wrote:Great play by ND's superstar Henderson to break down the defense and set up the winner (I really couldn't resist that).

It sure seemed like Stanford's central D's were unable to control the ND forwards. They both looked slow to me. I thought Verloo looked great Friday, but she got beat a LOT today, and also lost the ball under pressure a few times. I wonder if she isn't playing out of position there and shouldn't maybe be playing up more.

It was a very entertaining game. I REALLY wish the Pilots had been playing. From what I saw this weekend, I would say that UP, Notre Dame and Stanford are the class teams of this years field.

Haha. OK if you cite Henderson, you have to explain Press. Wasn't she your example Friday? It wasn't breakdown speed. it was hustle in the midfieled and making the other team uncomfortable. nobody looks good running toward their own goal, no matter how fast they are. Stanford tried a high line and failed.

I agree the central defenders looked slow (both of them) and we all know Verloo was the fastest player out of Oregon in a long time, so that can't be it. they were forced to play catchup by a superior midfield and crisp passes, which is what Stanford hung its hat on. I expect lots of people will be looking at film of this game....err..if there was film.

Notre Dame deserved the game by taking over midway in the first half and not letting Stanford do much of anything. Stanford sabotaged itself with so many bad basses and bad decisions about when to go one-on-one or pass. Really, Stanford looked like nothing special after 20 minutes or so, which I found shocking. They seemed to have no plan and no ability to stop ND. At the end, when Stanford was desperate for a goal and pressing upfield, ND was getting all the best shots.

Who would have predicted that a Canadian, Adriana Leon from Maple, Ontario, would be the goal-scorer? Better keep an eye on her since she is just a freshman. And Stanford freshman keeper Emily Oliver -- what a great game she played. Her defense gave up too many powerful shots from too close.

The ESPN announcers Beth Mowins and Julie Foudy did not add much. Mowins kept kept repeating certain statistics (e.g., Notre Dame having the hardest road to the cup of any team this year; Stanford needing 1 win for its 100th NCAA championship; Press being nation's top scorer; ND never losing when Henderson gets a point). They forgot to explain what was going on in any depth. That grew tiresome. Women's soccer coverage has room to improve.

Carrying PH's thoughts forward a little more, I am wondering if our posters think maybe Stanford was outcoached in terms of game preparation. They looked so dominant Friday, playing against a better team the ND was playing against, and yet Notre Dame seemed to have all the right answers today. From what I have seen previously, although Henderson is certainly a great player, she is not as dangerous as Press, and yet Henderson was the superstar who created the chances today, seemingly with a BIT less talented team. ND was able to make Press ineffective, and Stanford was not able to do likewise with Henderson.

Geezer - I decided not to quote you today (don't want to give you too big a head). But, I was surprised to see you post that Verloo was so fast in high school. Has she had an injury? Or, was she maybe fast without necessarily being quick? She did not seem to me to have the quickness to stay with the ND attackers. I really don't think it was lack of skill, but lack of quickness. I have only seen her play a few times now, and of course never in high school. She did seem very dangerous to me carrying the ball forward, which is why I thought she might be more effective playing up more.

Fan from afar: I think you are right that Stanford was outcoached. When your midfield is not conecting with the forwards and not getting your top scorer the ball, then something is wrong at the top. I could be less charitable and say Stanford choked, but given how Notre Dame made Stanford look mortal and vulnerable again and again, I think ND coaches deserve a lot of credit. No one else had that effect on the Cardinal since a couple of early season ties, and no one else shut them out.

purple haze wrote:The ESPN announcers Beth Mowins and Julie Foudy did not add much. Mowins kept kept repeating certain statistics (e.g., Notre Dame having the hardest road to the cup of any team this year; Stanford needing 1 win for its 100th NCAA championship; Press being nation's top scorer; ND never losing when Henderson gets a point). They forgot to explain what was going on in any depth. That grew tiresome. Women's soccer coverage has room to improve.

Paging Megan Sweeney.... Megan Sweeney, please pick up the white courtesy phone.

fan from afar wrote:.

Geezer - I decided not to quote you today (don't want to give you too big a head). But, I was surprised to see you post that Verloo was so fast in high school. Has she had an injury? Or, was she maybe fast without necessarily being quick? She did not seem to me to have the quickness to stay with the ND attackers. I really don't think it was lack of skill, but lack of quickness. I have only seen her play a few times now, and of course never in high school. She did seem very dangerous to me carrying the ball forward, which is why I thought she might be more effective playing up more.

You don't have to worry about my swelled head. It's too late

I think if you look at old posts here and news accounts in the Oregonian you will find that most people who saw Oregon players from when she was being recruited, she was the speed demon, Johnson was slower and a better playmaker, and Johnson was characterized as a more rugged a player (she doesnt seem so slow to me now) They each got Player of the year award in Oregon. Kendall got two. I can't remember if Courtney got one or two, she concentrated on the u17's I think.

Here's some posts on the comparisons. You'll recognize some names on KFTC's lists:

https://www.pilotnation.net/women-s-soccer-f7/the-oregonian-s-prep-all-state-soccer-teams-t541.htm#2983

Verloo was often compared to Tiffeny, and the view was that she has Tiff's speed And moves. She certainly challenged Tiff's goal production in prep.

Being fast and quick is one thing. Being able to react to a quick player quite another. Maybe she doesn't have the reactions of a defender. She didn't have to do it before Stanford. Some coaches think you can take a forward and make them defend. I'm not so sure.

But the back line got hung out to dry, I think. They weren't supported by the mids. I said before that nobody looks good running at their own goal...

My memory of this is dim, but she might have had leg issues last year...hamstring?

ninjapizza wrote:

purple haze wrote:The ESPN announcers Beth Mowins and Julie Foudy did not add much. Mowins kept kept repeating certain statistics (e.g., Notre Dame having the hardest road to the cup of any team this year; Stanford needing 1 win for its 100th NCAA championship; Press being nation's top scorer; ND never losing when Henderson gets a point). They forgot to explain what was going on in any depth. That grew tiresome. Women's soccer coverage has room to improve.

Paging Megan Sweeney.... Megan Sweeney, please pick up the white courtesy phone.

Or bring in Ian Darke and John Harkes like they did for the MLS Cup Final. "Go go Notre Dame!"

If you don't like a lot of statistics being thrown at you Hope Solo would be a good choice.

I think most teams were afraid of Stanford and put too many resources into defense. That's what the Pilots seemed to be doing in the first half when they played Stanford. In the second half, the Pilots put high pressure on them both on the defenders and on the mid-fielders, and Stanford did not handle it well. I was hoping like heck that the Pilots would be able to play them again, because I think they would have put high pressure on them the whole game and would have won, especially since I think Stanford would have been expecting to cruise. Today, that is exactly the tactical approach Notre Dame took and it worked. Credit to them that they were able to do it.

Darn, darn, darn, the Pilots could have won it all. I'm sure they're going nuts thinking about what could have been!

fan from afar wrote:
I was surprised to see you post that Verloo was so fast in high school. Has she had an injury? Or, was she maybe fast without necessarily being quick? She did not seem to me to have the quickness to stay with the ND attackers. I really don't think it was lack of skill, but lack of quickness.

revisiting this, here's part of an article from Graham Hayes from before the final metioning an injury to Verloo this year. (she also had one last year)

Stanford: Courtney Verloo to defense

~~~~~~~

This move came early, before the opening game, in fact, but it set the tone for Stanford quickly finding its footing this fall after losing three starters from last year Considering it was Levin who briefly moved back to the middle of defense when Verloo missed the first two NCAA tournament games with an injury, it's no stretch to think the Cardinal might have been reluctant to tinker with her in the first place if there had been any questions about Verloo's ability to hold down the fort.

"It's a completely different end of spectrum for me," Verloo said after the season's first game, a 1-1 draw against Boston College. "There's quite a bit to learn."

As might be expected of a Stanford product, she seems to have soaked in plenty of knowledge, making the most of playing between two stalwarts in Rachel Quon and Alina Garciamendez.

"She's very good on the ball, playmaking, she's a good one-v.-one defender," Ratcliffe said. "She's very quick and a tenacious tackler. She's just an overall good player. She could play up front, too, for us this weekend and make a big impact, there's no doubt about it."

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/columns/story?columnist=hays_graham&id=5875876

It's not beyond possibility that she wasn't 100% for the final. She sat some at the end season and two games at the start of the tournament. It's a long season and there may be other things we don't know about. We don't always know all the injuries on the UP team....

She did seem to have some kind of wrap around one leg. And, to amplify what you said earlier, she not only probably had very little experience in high school having to defend in the defensive end, she also probably did not have that much experience being under constant pressure back there this year. Defending one on one in the defensive third is definitely different than defending one on one elsewhere.

Actually, you probably don't have to be fast or especially quick (they are very different qualities) to be an effective central defender. I don't think Cloee is especially fast, and she didn't seem to me to have especially quick feet - she just knows how to play the position.