Spring Schedule

A_Fan wrote:No raincoats necessary.

As the King's advisor said to the King, after he had beheaded his last Count just as the Count was blurting out, "Wait, I'll tell you who else was plotting ...,":

"Don't hatchet your Counts before they chicken."

I'm in....And I know where he lives.

Looking forward to one more chance to preview the 2011 Pilots. A Fan - you will have much to answer for if the weather turns nasty on us!

Unless some players are magically healed I assume we will be looking at the latest rotation of the 3 GKs - with one half each for two of them; and 11 (maybe 12) outfielders seeing a lot of playing time.

Having watched Spurs and Arsenal split 6 goals in a thriller midweek I'm hoping for a much more one-sided game this afternoon.

Weather.com says 62 and 10% chance of rain at game time.

Where are all the cowbells? I think I've only heard one ringing out Pilot goals this spring. They didn't hand the bells out last season for them to end up unloved and stuck in a drawer somewhere.

Properly chastised.

Anyone else stopping by Nike?

Anyone stopping by Nike is out of luck. Although the Nike staff said there would be a game today, we saw no sign of any soccer activity anywhere. So I'm guessing that the game was at Merlo after all. Wrong side of town and too much traffic for me to get there from Beaverton. Just blew it.

Merlo was the place. The Pilots men lost, I heard, to the U-18 men 1-0.

The women tied Oregon State 1-1. In the first half, OSU looked the better team and scored on an unforced turnover and a big defensive lapse. OSU was bigger and very physical and had the Pilots discombobulated. The Pilots switched to a 4-4-2 in the second half and looked better and better as the game wore on, scoring the tieing goal on a great back-heel pass by Amanda Frisbie. There was debate about the scorer - either Capelle or Brooke. The Pilots were dominating at the end and easily could have scored two more.

But the day had what may to turn out to be very bad news. Kendall went down in the first half, a non-contact fall after trying to turn her body out of the way of a ball. Although she walked off the field, her team-mates looked very upset. They iced her knee and following half-time, she left with her parents. It had all the look of the dreaded .... Let's hope it's just a knee sprain, but it did not look good.

Taylor got a header to Amanda's feet and Amanda took a couple steps toward goal and did the very pretty backheel to Micaela.

Kendall's mom said Kendall heard a pop. From the looks of Cloee, who was the closest player, she heard it, too.


Pretty much guarantees she won't report to the u23 camp tomorrow. Let's hope that's all she misses.

I heard a pop...and I was sitting at midfield, Chiles Center side. Ugh!

But, when she got up and walked herself off the pitch...I thought that was a very good sign? Crossing fingers....

Then there was Chloe's taken down too a little after Kendall? Remember that one? Pretty brutal. I was so relieved when she shook it off and continued to play.

GO PILOTS!!!

Nobody touched Kendall.

With the Spring schedule completed, who of the group look pretty sure to be starting in the Fall? Here are some of my guesses:

Keeper - I have no idea. All three looked pretty decent, but with some differences in their kicking games.

Central Defender - Michelle Olivier. She had an excellent Spring season.

Outside Defender - We didn't get to see much of Michelle Cruz due to her injury, so it's hard to tell for her on the right side. Nevertheless, I'm betting she'll be starting somewhere. With Kendall Johnson appearing likely to miss the entire season, this leaves a huge hole to fill on the left. She was very strong as a defender and also a major cog in the Pilots' attack. At this point, I can't hazzard a guess for either side.

Midfielder - Taylor Brooke, Dani Foxhoven, Cloee Colohan

Forward - Amanda Frisbie (biggest guess). But, since she's a lefty, could she move back to left defense?

With these guesses, I see 4 spots up for grabs. That seems like a lot. Also, I recognize that we did not see Cassie McCluskie or Ellen Parker on the field at all. As I recall, Ellen had some surgery so I assume she's still rehabbing. I have no idea what Cassie's situation is.

I think others had good to decent Spring seasons, but at this point I don't feel confident we'll see them starting.

Thank God Playmaker is not a soccer coach with his ability to assess talent/ability.

cannalla wrote:Thank God Playmaker is not a soccer coach with his ability to assess talent/ability.

not fair to just take a shot and run. If you want to get in the game, lets hear your choices.

Fair enough - these aren't choices but observances. Fwds - generally lack speed. Micaela is quick but small. Mids - Dani --still think forward is her position. Cruz is a natural mid vs at back position. Def - Michelle O is steady although had some yips yesterday. Taylor at right back makes sense with her energy and ability to run the field and Bridges at left back also does- good speed, left footed--held her own against speedy #3 yesterday minus last play in first half (errant shot).

See there? Now we have something to talk about. Let's pick your evaluation of one player.

I am always confused when fans evaluate soccer players and use height as a pejorative. It always strikes me that such a person knows very little about what it takes to be a productive soccer player, or they have an agenda.

Micaela is the same height as Diego Maradona. I don't think anybody thinks he was vertically challenged. ( he claims and aspires to 5'5", but that's a lie.) Leo Messi is only two inches taller than she, and those two are royalty in the men's game.

And I'm sure you were thinking about OSU's Jenna Richardson (#3) yesterday. I admired her play, too, but Micaela scored more goals and handed out more assists that she did last year ( both freshmen). That extra 3 inches Jenna has doesn't give her extra credit when she scores.

In fact, Micaela is the same height as and had a better year than Amy Rodruiguez had any year at USC
( she's on the national team, but I guess you would say she is too short also.)

cannalla wrote:Fair enough - these aren't choices but observances. Fwds - generally lack speed. Micaela is quick but small. Mids - Dani --still think forward is her position. Cruz is a natural mid vs at back position. Def - Michelle O is steady although had some yips yesterday. Taylor at right back makes sense with her energy and ability to run the field and Bridges at left back also does- good speed, left footed--held her own against speedy #3 yesterday minus last play in first half (errant shot).

It took me a while, but I figured out that I'm "Playmaker" in your earlier post, which let me know that I've graduated to a higher level apparently due to my number of posts on PN (which says nothing about my soccer knowledge, obviously). Actually, I'm UPSoccerFanatic. Or, UPSF will do.

To be clear, I was not describing my "choices." I was describing what I thought we would see in the Fall.

I agree with part of your initial comment (the "Thank God [UPSF] is not a soccer coach" part) and don't really disagree with most of the above comment. My statement about Dani had to do with where I think the staff will play Dani, which probably will have more to do with the other personnel than with her. The same with Cruz. I agree about MO, but I'm also thinking in terms of all four Spring games, not just the OSU game. Taylor could be in either spot (right mid or right defense), but she's been playing right mid including when Cruz was fully healthy and playing right defense behind her earlier in the Spring. We really don't disagree there, except as to Cruz, and as I said, with Cruz what I was referring to was where I think the staff might play her rather than what might be her "natural position." With Bridges, I think she's improved but I'll stand with my initial post on this topic: I think she might be a starter, but might not be, so I didn't put her on my list.

So, Cannalla, I'd love to see not just your evaluations, but also who you think we are likely to see in the starting lineup in the Fall. I'd love to see others' predictions too. If you're not sure about some positions, just leave them open for the time being. Then, come Fall, we can see how we all did with our predictions.

I've only made it too a couple of the spring games so I might not have the full story on who shined this spring.

Also, I expect there to be changes in the formation depending on the opponent next fall given the experimentation we saw in the spring. The starting 11 might change depending on that too.

Therefore, I'll be a little vague on whether those on the outside play back or mid. Also, Hollenbeck on the 2005 time was so valuable being the enforcer type (i.e. Luke on the '77 Blazers) on the back line. Man did she shut down some forwards in the playoffs. Do we want that style in the backline or the overlaping runs of Tsao/Reed the last few years??

GK-- I'm thinking they will only use two keepers next year and split the time. With H. DeYoung having one more year of eligibiliy I am thinking N Downing will play and E Dees with red shirt. That gives both Dees/Downing 3 more years eligibility after next fall.

Central defenders: I expect M Olivier, K McCluskie, and E Nelson to share the time there. M Klier to be a sub on D.

In the middle, expect C Colohan to be the 1 there if we play the 4-1-3-2. I kind of liked having her there as she can break a lot of teams down before they get to our back line. If we play 4-4-2 then Cloee moves back and the bar on Hawthorne doesn't have to change its name. I think D Foxhoven will be at attacking mid. She will get a rest when Parker comes in.

Up top, H Kreminski, A Frisbie, and M Capella.

On the outside, K Johnson had a lock. Wishing her speedy recovery. S Bidges, M Cruz, and T Brooke will start somewhere.

Will any of the Freshmen crack the starting lineup? Site unseen, it is a guess. Most likely to see action are K Cameli up top somewhere and R Kurle on D. L McCluskie, M Leahy, and E Sipple will likely be subs their freshman year.

Not a Spring game of ours, and Spring games don't mean much, but here's an interesting result nevertheless.


http://pacifictigers.cstv.com/sports/w-soccer/spec-rel/041711aaa.html

That is an interesting result, spring or not.

Geezer, I'm surprised you didn't mention the vertically challenged Tiffeny Milbrette who at 5'2" (2" shorter than MC) somehow managed to have a pretty good career at all levels of the game.

A_Fan wrote:That is an interesting result, spring or not.

Geezer, I'm surprised you didn't mention the vertically challenged Tiffeny Milbrette who at 5'2" (2" shorter than MC) somehow managed to have a pretty good career at all levels of the game.

Oh, there's lots of places I could have gone. Micaela is one inch shorter than Shannon and Enyeart, too. I picked AROD because they are the same height and AROD is on the Nats now.


But the one i'm kicking myself for missing is the number 5 all time scorer in the UP pantheon. (her 100 points Is #7 on the points list -tied with Dani and others, and her 46 goals is behind only Sinclair, Milbrett, Macmillan, and Enyeart -- she's ahead of AROD on all counts)

Vanessa Talbott was listed at 5'0" in her bio.... In high heels ... maybe.


She sat next to me in the stands when she was being recruited. We struck up a conversation and she told me she was going to be a Pilot. I said "Great. That's something all kids should aspire to."
She said " No, I mean next fall".

So, four of the top five UP goal scorers were 5'5" or under.

I believe that's Dr.Talbott nowadays - she had aspirations beyond soccer.

FWIW I attended Stanford-Pacific spring game...Stanford didn't have 3 starting fullbacks(Garciamendez,Verloo,and Quon) GK Emily Oliver played only 10 minutes in field,no Noyola or Zurmuhlen in midfield, Levin had to be switched back to centerback to calm the confusion as Noquiera startd at centerback...Pacific desperately wanted to beat Stanford...one goal was keeper error...having said all that Stanford played like they were not very competent strangers
On subject of Beavers and Pilots...I thought Beavers outplayed and outphysicalled Stanford last year after they gave up early goal whereas Pilots were completely dominated by Cards...I think Pac10 is just a more physical league...

BroncoBilly wrote:FWIW I attended Stanford-Pacific spring game...Stanford didn't have 3 starting fullbacks(Garciamendez,Verloo,and Quon) GK Emily Oliver played only 10 minutes in field,no Noyola or Zurmuhlen in midfield, Levin had to be switched back to centerback to calm the confusion as Noquiera startd at centerback...Pacific desperately wanted to beat Stanford...one goal was keeper error...having said all that Stanford played like they were not very competent strangers
On subject of Beavers and Pilots...I thought Beavers outplayed and outphysicalled Stanford last year after they gave up early goal whereas Pilots were completely dominated by Cards...I think Pac10 is just a more physical league...

Haha. Spring game trash talk.

your's is an interesting comparison, but doesn't quite scan if you know that OSU lost to Stanford by two goals and went scoreless, UP is playing with just about the same roster count as Stanford, UP had most of the possession and chances against OSU at the end of Saturday's game despite being shorthanded, And the team Stanford lost to Saturday isn't exactly in a conference known for physical play.

And UP did outscore Stanford in the second half last year and hit the post. If Stanford sets it's standard of domination as a one goal win, then I guess folks are right, Stanford got dominated by Notre Dame, UP dominated the Broncos, and Pacific dominated Stanford.

For the record domination of a team or conference, regardless of how physical, is something like.... 4 goals in a college cup game or an entire recruiting class going through college without ever seeing a goal scored on an opponent.(cough). And Portland was 6-1-0 two years ago, 3-1-1 last year and 2-0-1 this Spring against the rough tough PAC10.

And all teams want to desperately beat UP, Spring game or not.

Sorry...wasn't trashtalking in any way..I was just offering some context on Stanford-Pacific spring game...and commenting on Beaver's "physical play" meme, not on game I didn't see.
I attended both Stanford-OSU and Stanford-UP games. Did you? I don't see how any objective observer could not conclude that Card didn't dominate that game as first half shots were 11-1 with Pilots first shot in 44th minute...second half more even' after they put Sophie back in mid, but IMO Card still had run of play much to my dismay...I even told Card fans around me that Sophie would be best midfielder on pitch despite Stanford's 2 or 3 All American midfielders...then she plays forward!
As for OSU_Stanford game, after 1st goal Beavers took play to Cards pressuring and exposing backline in a way that Notre Dame replicated in dominating Stanford and the 2-0 didn't represent accurately the flow of game...I could see how you could scan the result as just another comfortable 2-0 Stanford win but IMO it was a very even game with OSU the aggressors
As for UP-SCU game I said on this board that Pilots were better team and deserved the win(contrary to Jerry Smith) even tho Broncos hit the post and had chance after chance in last 15 minutes
I try to be objective and love the way the Pilots play(and SCU used to play)
but am afraid Pac 10 recruiting has changed the balance of power...Broncos first spring game against Cal was not encouraging although we won 1-0 despite Bears having the better of play

I thought SCU had a top5 recruiting class coming in?