orange beard
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2022
- Messages
- 2,130
- Likes
- 3,094
Espn + at least on replay spent very little bandwith on that game I thought I was watching a Jefferson Pilot game from back in the day.Good to get a win. Good to score some goals early in the second half after the Vols played a pretty pedestrian first half.
This match showed how dependent we've become on Huff--who scored our first goal with a very impressive, quickly-taken left-footed shot, then set up the next two goals with nice runs and layoffs to an open Thomas. We need to play faster and a bit more creatively. Don't think we're as good this year in attack with the 3-5-2 as we were last year in a 4-4-2. In theory the 3-5-2 should give us more in attack--but in practice it's not working as well, in my opinion. The reason is that we had two good players playing high-lying outside backs last year in Rain and Katz. This year Rain and Katz are in the back line, and we've lost some quality in the outside midfield areas where they excelled last year.
Stayart has looked pretty solid this year as a midfield sub. Might be a half-step slow but seems to have a good understanding of the game and has been doing some good things--including getting her first career goal tonight. Midgley got some good minutes and looked a lot better than she did against SMU. Hennessey with a lot of good minutes tonight and looked decent. Has some qualities as a defender but I worry a bit about her pace/recovery speed.
I'm happy to be able to see these matches on SEC+, and thankful for the UT broadcast that makes it possible. But these broadcasters that we have are a bit frustrating. I don't want to be too critical--they're young (or relatively so) and inexperienced--but it's clear that they don't know very much about soccer or the team. In the first half the guy tonight said of Fusco: "She can play any of the up-front positions." Huh? She's never played up front--and she's only ever played one midfield position in her UT career. Beyond that, he completely failed to keep up with UT's subs. He actually ID'd far more Bowling Green subs than UT's. One could see there were new players in the game--but he hadn't ID'd them when they came in, and for whom, and we'd only learn who they were 5 or 10 minutes after they'd hit the pitch. There were 2 UT subs--Dakota Brown and Ally Brown--whom I'm quite sure he did not identify at all. You have to keep up with the subs--it's a basic of broadcasting.
Nice win! I particularly enjoyed seeing Ms. Huff return to her top gear and to see Ms. George back to her regularly excellent job of being a beast to opponents' defensive backs. Jaida Thomas is a finishing machine, but I still think Huff and George are the keys to offensive success for the Vols.
I know they kept a clean sheet, but the three back set still appeared very vulnerable to attacks over the top and through the wide seams that are created when the back three are challenged. The fact that BG didn't convert for a couple of scores was fortunate. They had several solid offensive opportunities. A second center back or a second defensive center mid sitting deep would give me a lot more confidence in the team's success going forward.
Burdette cleaned up a lot of stuff in the first half.Last year the Vols rolled playing a 4-4-2 formation. It was strong defensively because we had two solid CBs, Rain and Katz at outsideback, and then Burdette as defensive mid--not to mention Huff and Fusco doing a lot of defensive work.
We brought all by one centerback back from that team. One would think: You find one good, new centerback to play alongside Renie and you roll with the formation that was so effective last year.
But no: the coaches tried the 3-5-2 in the spring, apparently thought it successful--and Kirt has stuck with it. I'm not sold on it, at all, and indeed this team in this new formation does not look as good as last year's team so far. We did play a solid game against Duke--until we blew it over an inept 10-minute stretch--but on the whole I have my doubts about this new setup. The best thing it's done is move Huff more centrally so that she's playing a more traditional attacking mid (10) role. (Last year she played mostly on the right.)
That's a good thing, I suppose--but to make this new setup work the coaches moved our two good outside backs, Rain and Katz, back to the back line, to play with Renie. That's a somewhat substantial change. Last year they both could play fairly high and they were good at helping the team keep opponent's pinned in their half and in pressuring opponents with the ball (via crosses, dribbles, etc.). Now, those roles have been somewhat taken over by Zaluski and Nelson, and we're simply not as strong in the wide areas of the field. I have serious doubts about Nelson as a midfielder. She's had a couple of assists--and can do that when she doesn't have to worry about helping to get the ball forward into the opponent's attacking half--but I've just not been impressed by her play. Rain and Katz are still getting forward a bit--it was Rain who made the perfect cross to Huff for the goal against Duke--but only one can do so at a time as the other has to stay back and cover our back line defensively with Renie. We seem more vulnerable defensively than we were last year. UNC gave the right side of our defense (Nelson and Katz) all sorts of problems in the 2nd half of that game.
My general feeling is: why go away from a setup that worked so well last year? You need to fill only one role: Fill it and roll on. Instead, the coaches have changed multiple roles. It's like when, say, your left tackle gets injured in football. The general rule is that it's better to simply find a competent replacement left tackle rather than start jiggling your line--say, moving your right guard to play the left tackle spot and then finding a new player for right guard. Now you've got two players who have to adapt to new positions rather than one. That is to be avoided, if you can help it.
It may be that my views are colored by the games we didn't get results in against SMU and Duke. Had we won those games, as we should have, there'd be less concern, perhaps. Even so, I don't think we're as good right now as we were in the second half of last year. We're a different team. We've only made the one player chanin the firsthalf ige--French is gone and Nelson is in--but in terms of roles the change is more comprehensive.
I think we can say that the jury is still out on this new setup--and assuming we stick with it, we really won't get a read on it and this team until our first couple of SEC games. They will tell us a lot. Our next two/three non-conference games will not tell us anything. We simply have to win our first three SEC matches. If we can do that, we can get ourselves on a roll and develop some RPI momentum. In what to me was a major surprise, Alabama beat Clemson last week, so that will not be an easy match--but it's one we pretty much have to win.