USC on 9/16

RipCityPilot wrote:You would like that a team of USC's quality and a university with USC's wealth would have a better soccer facility. But, I suppose space is not easy to come by in LA.

Actually it wasn't as bad as I'd been lead to expect. Most of the fields I've seen in the area are very hard and dryed up; McAlister's grass wasn't at Merlo standards, but for LA, it was really quite good.

However, from my perspective, we could have used a cover over the bleachers to shade us from the sun.....but now that I think about it....maybe that's why they're called "bleachers"......'cause we were sure bleaching on those metal boards. And really, that's what we've got at Merlo too.

I believe USC plays some of their games at Memorial Coliseum, but that can't even touch McAlister for allowing the fans to be "in" the game. Again, it seems it's a "practice" field, but I've seen much worse settings than this park like atmosphere. Did I mention the hot sun?

We will be getting our canopy soon. at least we have stadium seats that aren't as hot.

Oh, you don't?

whoops....

What do you mean, "we will be getting our canopy soon?" You mean the canopy known as a Poncho?



I also noticed on the game tracker it looked like USC played some games in the Coliseum, but that would be one empty 90,000+ seat stadium for that soccer game. Even for a UP game it would look empty.

I have to agree with PPT's comments on the 2nd USC goal being too close to tell.

Every couple years they try to get a crowd for the UCLA-USC match

They have managed 7800+ and 8500+ in the last two attempts. The latter is an NCAA regular season record.

Admission is free for students of both schools and admission is $3 for several target segments.

It sounds like a Great crowd and is an accomplishment for Women's soccer, but my understanding was the gate didn't pay for the lighting bill.

and it must have seemed near empty.


We are getting a state of the art canopy. All that is lacking is a donor.

Geezaldinho wrote:We are getting a state of the art canopy. All that is lacking is a donor.

I have this much money to offer: Think it is enough to get it named after me? Merlo Field covered by the RipCityPilot Canopy at the Clive Charles Soccer Complex? Yeah it has a nice ring to it.

state of the art - which hopefully means retractable? For the days with beautiful weather.

RCP, I got your canopy for you. Definitely retractable.

I loved Amanda's second goal. She is driving for the far post with an SC player on her right hip and then she just taps the ball with the outside of her left foot inside the left post.

Amanda Frisbie was not only WCC Women's Soccer POW (making UP 3/5 on those and also Frisbie's 2nd), but she was also US Bank UP Student Athlete of the Week?

http://www.wccsports.com/sports/w-soccer/spec-rel/091712aac.html
http://www.portlandpilots.com/news/2012/9/17/WSOC_0917125848.aspx

Anyone have a status update on Lorielle? Why didn't Ellen play? How did Devlyn do in her first start & extensive play?

The silver lining of having such a small squad: the freshmen should all get ample playing time.

If you recall, Lorielle had a concussion. I doubt they even bother with the test to see if she is recovered the first week.


Ellen had a wrap on her knee/calf last week and was icing it. Hopefully, she will be good to go this weekend.

Looking on the tape, it looks like DJ did fine for her first start. It looked like she might have deserved credit for an assist. I didn't check the box score.

From the video, it looked like Amanda's second goal was clearly the result of a tremendous effort by Micaela to get the ball back and then passed it well forward for Amanda to run onto. The boxscore shows this as an unassisted goal, so what is the rule for an assist? If not for Micaela's great effort and pass up the field, no goal.

ejjqb wrote:From the video, it looked like Amanda's second goal was clearly the result of a tremendous effort by Micaela to get the ball back and then passed it well forward for Amanda to run onto. The boxscore shows this as an unassisted goal, so what is the rule for an assist? If not for Micaela's great effort and pass up the field, no goal.

It's not an assist if Amanda had to elude the defender, but it looks to me like all Amanda had to do is outrun the defender. I don't think the little fake on the keeper counts.

But the NCAA has a whole thing on scoring goals and assists here:
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/Stats_Manuals/Soccer/2009ez.pdf

Makes little sense to me. I know if it were Notre Dame scorekeepers, they would have awarded two assists.

Psychotic, Thanks for posting the YouTube links. It looks like it was a good game with both teams having many opportunities to put goals in the back of the net.

Kudos to Erin D for the game she played. The highlights showed her making some great saves. With each game, she seems to be coming into her own.

Thanks to that performance, we have moved up to No. 15 in the NSCAA rankings.

http://www.nscaa.com/rankings/1259/NCAADivisionI/women/National/Poll5?preview=5ebeb6065f64f2346dbb00ab789cf001

An oddity Of the ranking is that BYU is listed as #12 even though they are #1 in the current RPI

Where do you get your simulated RPI numbers?

https://sites.google.com/site/rpifordivisioniwomenssoccer/rpi-reports ?
https://www.nc-soccer.com/wsoccer/2012/?game&recs ?

RipCityPilot wrote:Where do you get your simulated RPI numbers?

https://sites.google.com/site/rpifordivisioniwomenssoccer/rpi-reports ?
https://www.nc-soccer.com/wsoccer/2012/?game&recs ?

Yes, both independent ( more or less) sources.

You can get an instant adjusted and unadjusted RPI maintained by a UNC fan here:

https://www.nc-soccer.com/wsoccer/2012/index_arpi

It changes with each result entered in the database. At this time of year, it is very fluid.
You can sort by column by clicking on the headers. Clicking again sorts in reverse order.


Or you can get the weekly updates and a more in-depth analysis from our own UPSF here:

https://sites.google.com/site/rpifordivisioniwomenssoccer/rpi-reports

He updates Tuesdays, usually. The latest one is here:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxycGlmb3JkaXZpc2lvbml3b21lbnNzb2NjZXJ8Z3g6ZTFmZjY5ZjQ0MThlNDEz



He includes an alternate RPI which includes, as I understand it, results against opponents in both elements 1 and 2. It show a few large discrepancies for teams that play very  tough schedules but lose, or for teams with great records who play cupcakes.


Both are great resources for following how the RPI develops, and keep the NCAA statisticians honest. There have been mistakes.


Last week I watched as UP varied between 13 and 26 without playing a game.

RipCityPilot wrote:Where do you get your simulated RPI numbers?

It would seem that UPSF is the best source of the RPI. No East Coast bias after over 40 years in the West!

But is he sharing?

Geezaldinho wrote:We are getting a state of the art canopy. All that is lacking is a donor.

Denver-area pigeons have apparently been pooping on Broncos fans in the section 306 of Sports Authority Field at Mile High and the fans have had to devise their own canopies to protect themselves.

DoubleDipper wrote:

But is he sharing?

Just need to check the regular attachments at the bottom of his site. The latest was today.

Geezaldinho wrote:We will be getting our canopy soon. at least we have stadium seats that aren't as hot.

It’s usually not that hot in the UK either, but when it is, soccer fans turn the traditional four corner hankie canopy to ward off the nasty noon day sun.

DoubleDipper wrote:

Geezaldinho wrote:We are getting a state of the art canopy. All that is lacking is a donor.

Denver-area pigeons have apparently been pooping on Broncos fans in the section 306 of Sports Authority Field at Mile High and the fans have had to devise their own canopies to protect themselves.

Halftime falconry!

DoubleDipper wrote:

Geezaldinho wrote:We will be getting our canopy soon. at least we have stadium seats that aren't as hot.

It’s usually not that hot in the UK either, but when it is, soccer fans turn the traditional four corner hankie canopy to ward off the nasty noon day sun.

In the climbing world those are called turswirys.

The NYT ran an article in the late 60's about the generation of climbers before mine in the shawangunk mountains ( Hans Kraus, specifically. google him. He was Kennedy's back doctor). A picture was attached with Hans wearing one of those and he was described as a ' terse, wirey leader'.

We all mimiced him in homage and the name stuck.

Here is a picture from the cover of his biography with a modified version. Knots tucked under.

Randy Johnson figures out how to help with the pigeon problem