Official 2015 Soccer Thread

[Defaultuser]

Sad how far they have fallen since '08.

 

[armchair]

A brutal ending to a frustrating year, which started by losing two starters before the season was 10 minutes old. Without them our attack really struggled for most of the year, there wasn't much chemistry among our people up front--and we couldn't score enough to win games. We had 10 goals in 11 SEC games, so we averaged /less than 1 goal/ a game. That's ultimately why we're not in the tourney. We were not a good team: if one were to rate this team against the best teams in the /country/, I'd say we were a 5--and that might be generous, though ironically we played one of our best games early when we tied a Va. Tech team that is think is in the top 5 nationally now.

The Kentucky game was our Waterloo, as it turns out, that and the Ole Miss game, both at home. We played great against Kentucky, had some quality opportunities, and yet could only score one goal, didn't win the game, and that cost us. And we played a fairly solid game against Ole Miss but, again, couldn't score and lost. And then vandy's win last night against an Ole Miss team that had been on a roll sealed our fate. It's bitter because there were four teams tied for the last three spots going into last night--and we had not lost to the other three (one win and two ties), and yet we were the team to lose out. In the end 3 conference wins is not good enough.

Pensky has got to make some serious decisions about personnel and positions and formations next year. He should start in the back and go forward. We've got two spots to fill in the back four--centerback and outside right back--and we need to have good/potentially good players in those important spots. It will be interesting to see where Gouner plays--a young player with good athleticism and speed. She played outside back to start the year, I think she played some midfield in the middle of the year, and ended the year at forward. I'd put her at outside back, where she can fully utilize her pace and athleticism and get involved in attack. I don't see anyone who would be as good at that spot. Beyond that, I might try Wagner at centerback--somebody who's got some size and moves pretty well. Wagner is a forward/winger who seems likely to get lost in the logjam of players at forward and so is worth trying at another position.

How the midfield shakes out will be very interesting. With Christy back we might have a playmaker in the middle of the field, which we were sorely lacking this year. Then there is O'Keefe, Cousins and Baldwin--who were our three starters this year: all young, all played big minutes this year, but as a group they were very UNproductive group in attack, contributing almost no assists or goals, or even shots on goal all year. We can't have a repeat of that. Bialczak, who is an excellent athlete with pace, ended the year playing for Baldwin. O'Keefe is quick and nimble but light and not strong on the ball; Cousins is strong on the ball but not nimble. Baldwin is diligent but, as with Cousins, does not help score goals. Will Pensky keep Bialczak in the midfield or move her back to forward and play some combination of O'Keefe, Christy, Baldwin and Cousins in midfield? Bialczak has the potential to be a good forward--but she wasn't getting the ball enough and thus underutlized. I'd sure has hell keep her in the midfield and maybe play four in the middle (with Cousins in a deep role). Better to play on the front foot than the back.

The forward situation is a muddle--a number of different players with different skill sets. Neal and Kupritz are speedy and can run down balls but when they don't have space they are not effective. Neal's ball skills are suspect but she's also the only player we have who can get her head on the ball on corners. McClung has some size and skills but didn't get much help from our ineffective midfield and seems a bit unsuited for Pensky's direct (welp the ball down the field and hope for the best) attacking style. Freshman Massey has size and potential--where does she fit in? Freshman Marcano offers the most potential of the bunch, IMO--has the most complete set of qualities--pace, good with the ball, can strike the ball and has an attacking mentality, which god knows this team needs. Pensky needs to sort it all--and needs to get it right to boost quality chances and scoring. The team absolutely needs more chemistry and cohesiveness between the midfielders and forwards and fullbacks. That was a major problem this year.

I'm gutted, as the Brits say, not to see us play another game or two, but there it is. There is talent, that's the good news, but coaches will need to do a better job of unlocking it.

 

[MAD]

A brutal ending to a frustrating year, which started by losing two starters before the season was 10 minutes old. Without them our attack really struggled for most of the year, there wasn't much chemistry among our people up front--and we couldn't score enough to win games. We had 10 goals in 11 SEC games, so we averaged /less than 1 goal/ a game. That's ultimately why we're not in the tourney. We were not a good team: if one were to rate this team against the best teams in the /country/, I'd say we were a 5--and that might be generous, though ironically we played one of our best games early when we tied a Va. Tech team that is think is in the top 5 nationally now.

The Kentucky game was our Waterloo, as it turns out, that and the Ole Miss game, both at home. We played great against Kentucky, had some quality opportunities, and yet could only score one goal, didn't win the game, and that cost us. And we played a fairly solid game against Ole Miss but, again, couldn't score and lost. And then vandy's win last night against an Ole Miss team that had been on a roll sealed our fate. It's bitter because there were four teams tied for the last three spots going into last night--and we had not lost to the other three (one win and two ties), and yet we were the team to lose out. In the end 3 conference wins is not good enough.

Pensky has got to make some serious decisions about personnel and positions and formations next year. He should start in the back and go forward. We've got two spots to fill in the back four--centerback and outside right back--and we need to have good/potentially good players in those important spots. It will be interesting to see where Gouner plays--a young player with good athleticism and speed. She played outside back to start the year, I think she played some midfield in the middle of the year, and ended the year at forward. I'd put her at outside back, where she can fully utilize her pace and athleticism and get involved in attack. I don't see anyone who would be as good at that spot. Beyond that, I might try Wagner at centerback--somebody who's got some size and moves pretty well. Wagner is a forward/winger who seems likely to get lost in the logjam of players at forward and so is worth trying at another position.

How the midfield shakes out will be very interesting. With Christy back we might have a playmaker in the middle of the field, which we were sorely lacking this year. Then there is O'Keefe, Cousins and Baldwin--who were our three starters this year: all young, all played big minutes this year, but as a group they were very UNproductive group in attack, contributing almost no assists or goals, or even shots on goal all year. We can't have a repeat of that. Bialczak, who is an excellent athlete with pace, ended the year playing for Baldwin. O'Keefe is quick and nimble but light and not strong on the ball; Cousins is strong on the ball but not nimble. Baldwin is diligent but, as with Cousins, does not help score goals. Will Pensky keep Bialczak in the midfield or move her back to forward and play some combination of O'Keefe, Christy, Baldwin and Cousins in midfield? Bialczak has the potential to be a good forward--but she wasn't getting the ball enough and thus underutlized. I'd sure has hell keep her in the midfield and maybe play four in the middle (with Cousins in a deep role). Better to play on the front foot than the back.

The forward situation is a muddle--a number of different players with different skill sets. Neal and Kupritz are speedy and can run down balls but when they don't have space they are not effective. Neal's ball skills are suspect but she's also the only player we have who can get her head on the ball on corners. McClung has some size and skills but didn't get much help from our ineffective midfield and seems a bit unsuited for Pensky's direct (welp the ball down the field and hope for the best) attacking style. Freshman Massey has size and potential--where does she fit in? Freshman Marcano offers the most potential of the bunch, IMO--has the most complete set of qualities--pace, good with the ball, can strike the ball and has an attacking mentality, which god knows this team needs. Pensky needs to sort it all--and needs to get it right to boost quality chances and scoring. The team absolutely needs more chemistry and cohesiveness between the midfielders and forwards and fullbacks. That was a major problem this year.

I'm gutted, as the Brits say, not to see us play another game or two, but there it is. There is talent, that's the good news, but coaches will need to do a better job of unlocking it.

Wow, Armchair, that was a very impressive write up and I enjoyed reading it. That said, I agree the off season did come a little too early this year but the future is bright on Rocky Top.

 

[armchair]

Cousins was described today in a UT press release, related to her being named to the all-freshman team, as a defensive midfielder. That certainly seemed to confirm her role this year--as it was for fellow midfielder C. Baldwin. What I don't understand is how coach Pensky thinks he's going to beat anybody good playing a 4-3-3 formation--with 3 midfielders, two of whom (Baldwin and Cousins) play defense mostly. This might explain why UT struggled to score goals all year, which likewise might explain why the Vols were not good this year, and why in particular they were bad in attack and ultimately lost ever game but one (a tie) that they played against above-average teams, and scoring one goal or less in several games against below-average competition.

Does Pensky REALLY think he's going to beat good teams by focusing heavily on defense and hoping his forwards can make one or two great individual plays? If that is the strategy, it hasn't worked for two years--and it's not going to work. Your best-case scenario with that kind of strategy is a 1-1 tie--and that is if you play a great defensive game, which isn't so easy to do against good teams. You spend all day chasing the ball. It's no accident that when the athletic and speedy Bialczak started in midfield in place of Baldwin, the Vols played by far their best offensive game of the year, with 24/26 shots against Kentucky.

I frankly cringe at the idea that Pensky will start Baldwin and Cousins together in midfield next year. They both play hard, of course--but the only way you could play both and hope to be any good would be to play a four-man midfield instead of three, thus adding a second attacking/play-making midfielder to go with the two defensive mids. If you want a defensive midfielder in the game, or even two, fine--but shouldn't they be playing /between/ your back four and your midfield (which in turn would mean that you can't play three forwards). They can't just BE your midfield (along with O'Keefe)--as they don't help in attack, to create opportunities for your forwards--and you don't score goals. And yet they were, and UT didn't score goals.

 

[Vol Soc Fan]

Cousins was described today in a UT press release, related to her being named to the all-freshman team, as a defensive midfielder. That certainly seemed to confirm her role this year--as it was for fellow midfielder C. Baldwin. What I don't understand is how coach Pensky thinks he's going to beat anybody good playing a 4-3-3 formation--with 3 midfielders, two of whom (Baldwin and Cousins) play defense mostly. This might explain why UT struggled to score goals all year, which likewise might explain why the Vols were not good this year, and why in particular they were bad in attack and ultimately lost ever game but one (a tie) that they played against above-average teams, and scoring one goal or less in several games against below-average competition.

Does Pensky REALLY think he's going to beat good teams by focusing heavily on defense and hoping his forwards can make one or two great individual plays? If that is the strategy, it hasn't worked for two years--and it's not going to work. Your best-case scenario with that kind of strategy is a 1-1 tie--and that is if you play a great defensive game, which isn't so easy to do against good teams. You spend all day chasing the ball. It's no accident that when the athletic and speedy Bialczak started in midfield in place of Baldwin, the Vols played by far their best offensive game of the year, with 24/26 shots against Kentucky.

I frankly cringe at the idea that Pensky will start Baldwin and Cousins together in midfield next year. They both play hard, of course--but the only way you could play both and hope to be any good would be to play a four-man midfield instead of three, thus adding a second attacking/play-making midfielder to go with the two defensive mids. If you want a defensive midfielder in the game, or even two, fine--but shouldn't they be playing /between/ your back four and your midfield (which in turn would mean that you can't play three forwards). They can't just BE your midfield (along with O'Keefe)--as they don't help in attack, to create opportunities for your forwards--and you don't score goals. And yet they were, and UT didn't score goals.

I disagree with some of what you say, especially about the midfielders. I believe the biggest problem this year wasn't the midfielders but the backs - especially the starting outside backs. The outside backs rarely played balls to the mids and rarely kept the ball. That is unfortunate because the best players UT has on the ball are the mids you criticize. It is impossible for midfielders to generate and participate in an attack when the backs bypass them with balls to forwards. The outside backs also constantly gave the ball away on throw ins. I'd also suggest that while there may have been a quantity of shots against KY there really weren't high quality chances that challenged the goalie. The probability of those shots going in were near zero.

Because of the way the backs played UT was usually in a numbers down position on the attack and the forwards didn't hold the ball for mids to join the attack. The backs, especially outside backs also were slow to get into the attack because they were usually kicking long balls to forwards and either unable to cover the space and get into the attack or they gave the ball away. Think of it as being akin to hockey teams that play dump and chase.

Also, I don't think you can overstate the injuries and youth of the team. The Vols lost a ridiculous amount of player games to injury, some for the season and others for good parts or important parts of the season. This will be a big spring season for this group to have extensive training and get healthy. There is a lot of talent with this group. I think they will make huge step up next year.

 

[MAD]

ECKEL & COUSINS EARN ALL-SEC HONORS​

Senior goalkeeper Julie Eckel and freshman midfielder Katie Cousins represented the Vols as SEC all-conference performers.

View attachment 102421​

Tennessee soccer redshirt senior goalkeeper Julie Eckel and freshman midfielder Katie Cousins both earned All-SEC honors as announced by the league office on Sunday afternoon.
The Cordova, Tenn., native broke a handful of Tennessee career goalkeeping records during her standout senior season. Eckel became the Vols’ all-time leader among goalkeepers in saves (335), games played (81) and games started (79). She also finishes her career with the best save percentage (.817) in program history and ranks second all-time at UT in shutouts (31.4) and GAA (0.91).

Joining Eckel in earning conference recognition was Cousins, who became the Volunteers’ 12th SEC All-Freshman Team selection in program history. The midfielder from Forest, Va., played in all 18 games and started 17 of them for Tennessee this season, scoring one goal and recording one assist from her defensive midfield position. Cousins is the second Vol to earn all-freshman team honors in as many years, joining teammate Carlyn Baldwin, who was named an all-freshman performer in 2014.

 

[armchair]

I disagree with some of what you say, especially about the midfielders. I believe the biggest problem this year wasn't the midfielders but the backs - especially the starting outside backs. The outside backs rarely played balls to the mids and rarely kept the ball. That is unfortunate because the best players UT has on the ball are the mids you criticize. It is impossible for midfielders to generate and participate in an attack when the backs bypass them with balls to forwards. The outside backs also constantly gave the ball away on throw ins. I'd also suggest that while there may have been a quantity of shots against KY there really weren't high quality chances that challenged the goalie. The probability of those shots going in were near zero.

Because of the way the backs played UT was usually in a numbers down position on the attack and the forwards didn't hold the ball for mids to join the attack. The backs, especially outside backs also were slow to get into the attack because they were usually kicking long balls to forwards and either unable to cover the space and get into the attack or they gave the ball away. Think of it as being akin to hockey teams that play dump and chase.

Also, I don't think you can overstate the injuries and youth of the team. The Vols lost a ridiculous amount of player games to injury, some for the season and others for good parts or important parts of the season. This will be a big spring season for this group to have extensive training and get healthy. There is a lot of talent with this group. I think they will make huge step up next year.

The fullbacks WERE a problem. Everybody associated with the attack was a problem. The backs were not good enough to beat quality opponents--not athletic enough, not fast enough and made a lot of bad decisions with the ball when they got involved in attack. I think Gouner played right back to start the year, in reserve, and she might do very well in that spot as a starter. The other back spot should be open to competition: every spot should be open to competition.

The Vols had a number of attacking issues that were evident from the first games of the season. We needed more dynamism and pace and general menace in the midfield--and when Bialczak was switched, too late, we got that. We played nearly the entire year without a true playmaker and/or attacker in midfield--and the stats show it. Being good on the ball is nice but doesn't help much if it's always in the defensive half of the field--you are not creating anything on the offensive side of the field. The Vols had very little push up the middle of the field all year, very little combination play, and a general lack of cohesion.

I disagree with you about the Kentucky game. We had 26 shots in that game. I don't care what kind of shots they were--that was about twice as many as we had in any game all year, and in fact there were a number of good opportunities. Flynn had two or three, Marcano (underutlized all year) had a good chance, there were others. The attack was MILES better than it had been all year--and the attack will have to be lots better next year while at the same time improving in the back. I think it's doable.

Nice to have someone else talking Vol soccer!

 

[Vol Soc Fan]

The fullbacks WERE a problem. Everybody associated with the attack was a problem. The backs were not good enough to beat quality opponents--not athletic enough, not fast enough and made a lot of bad decisions with the ball when they got involved in attack. I think Gouner played right back to start the year, in reserve, and she might do very well in that spot as a starter. The other back spot should be open to competition: every spot should be open to competition.

The Vols had a number of attacking issues that were evident from the first games of the season. We needed more dynamism and pace and general menace in the midfield--and when Bialczak was switched, too late, we got that. We played nearly the entire year without a true playmaker and/or attacker in midfield--and the stats show it. Being good on the ball is nice but doesn't help much if it's always in the defensive half of the field--you are not creating anything on the offensive side of the field. The Vols had very little push up the middle of the field all year, very little combination play, and a general lack of cohesion.

I disagree with you about the Kentucky game. We had 26 shots in that game. I don't care what kind of shots they were--that was about twice as many as we had in any game all year, and in fact there were a number of good opportunities. Flynn had two or three, Marcano (underutlized all year) had a good chance, there were others. The attack was MILES better than it had been all year--and the attack will have to be lots better next year while at the same time improving in the back. I think it's doable.

Nice to have someone else talking Vol soccer!

The point I was making about the backs, especially the outside backs, is that possession and the quality of an attack starts from the back. Our mids rarely got in the attack because the backs launched long balls forward. Opponents understood the style of play and made sure UT was always in a numbers down position - which happened. In addition to the KY game, there were others where there was a high quantity of shots, but UT rarely strung a sequence of passes together that led to a high probability scoring chance. It was usually a situation being numbers down, launching a long ball into the box and hope someone would get a head on the ball.

 

[armchair]

Launching long balls has been our style under Pensky--playing direct--and it hasn't worked. Didn't work when Wilkinson was playing--though she certainly gave us a legit threat with her size on corners and crosses that we didn't have this year. (Our corner kick play, both ways, was pretty bad this year). No question we don't string passes together, and no question we need to become a better possession team--and more poised.

We did not have enough athleticism and pace on the field this year--there is not question about that--either at back or in midfield. O'Keefe was the only starting mid who could run well and get around the field. Mids who don't run well are a problem, to say the least. I question some of the personnel decisions this year. Gouner and Flynn played a lot in substitute roles and then late as starters--both probably should have been starters by the season's midway point if not sooner. Marcano, a talent and genuine attacking threat, should have played a lot more, based on what I saw; didn't understand that one at all.Speaking of youth, I just watched texas a&m handle Ole Miss in the SEC tournament--their best three players in attack are freshmen, two of whom scored goals today. Young team but athletic.

 

[armchair]

The SEC got six teams in the NCAA tourney. Missouri probably got screwed, and maybe Kentucky too--but that is what happens to teams in big conference who finish 7th/8th/9th: you can't count on getting selected even if you've had a respectable season because a lot of small conferences get bids, of course--and if there are tournament upsets in the smaller conferences, and there always are, you get left out. I think there were a few conference upsets this year. I think last year 9 or 10 SEC teams got in, so there was a drop-off. This year the ACC, the nation's best soccer conference, got 8 teams in.

The SEC was unlucky with seedings, as after first-round matches, at least four of our teams face top teams. LSU would meet no. 1 seed and defending champion Florida state in the Second-round. Auburn has a chance to win two games--but then would play FSU itself (assuming FSU beats LSU). Texas A&M would play very good UNC in the second round. South Carolina would play no. 1 seed Virginia in the second round. Florida, with a good seeding, should get to the 3rd round or the regional final. In the third round they would likely play Duke--a no. 3 seed but not as good as some of the big dogs (uva, stanford, fsu, unc). That is a winnable game for florida--and then it would play stanford, probably. UCLA, very surprisingly, did not make the tournament.

Florida State has a LOT of international players. I wonder if some of its ACC foes are getting annoyed with that, as the internationals tend to be a little older than the American players in their grade class, and all come to FSU with professional club experience. FSU started at least 4 internationals last year, and that is why, frankly, they won the national championship. This year FSU's three/four best players are from Europe (Ireland (2), Finland and Iceland). The individual named best player in the ACC tourney is a freshman FSU player from Finland--she'll be 20 soon, and has pro experience. Their best defender is a 22-year-old from Ireland--very good player. It's one thing to have 1 international--that's pretty common, we had Wilkinson--but when you've got 4-6 it can be a pretty significant advantage. You don't notice it so much because FSU's competition in the ACC is stout with unc and uva and notre dame--and FSU is really rather young this year after graduating a lot of players last year. Still, FSU has beaten very good UVA teams four out of the last five times they've played, and only lost this year in the regular season to UVA because one of its players unfairly received a red card (for a handball in the box). I haven't heard other ACC coaches complaining about it, maybe they don't think it's an issue, but the internationals do give FSU a noticeable edge, IMO.

I have noticed that while Pensky really seems to like play the 4-3-3 system, only Stanford, among all the other tops teams, favors that formation. Most of the other heavyweights pack the midfield--UNC typically plays 3-5-1; FSU plays 4-2-3-1, and UVA and UCLA tend to favor a 4-4-2 regularly. Everybody switches some, and Pensky played 4-4-2 in a couple of games earlier in the year. I think he should have stuck with that, but he went back to 4-3-3. Any formation can work if you've got excellent players in roles in which their talents can flourish, and the teams works together.

 

[MAD]

The SEC got six teams in the NCAA tourney. Missouri probably got screwed, and maybe Kentucky too--but that is what happens to teams in big conference who finish 7th/8th/9th: you can't count on getting selected even if you've had a respectable season because a lot of small conferences get bids, of course--and if there are tournament upsets in the smaller conferences, and there always are, you get left out. I think there were a few conference upsets this year. I think last year 9 or 10 SEC teams got in, so there was a drop-off. This year the ACC, the nation's best soccer conference, got 8 teams in.

The SEC was unlucky with seedings, as after first-round matches, at least four of our teams face top teams. LSU would meet no. 1 seed and defending champion Florida state in the Second-round. Auburn has a chance to win two games--but then would play FSU itself (assuming FSU beats LSU). Texas A&M would play very good UNC in the second round. South Carolina would play no. 1 seed Virginia in the second round. Florida, with a good seeding, should get to the 3rd round or the regional final. In the third round they would likely play Duke--a no. 3 seed but not as good as some of the big dogs (uva, stanford, fsu, unc). That is a winnable game for florida--and then it would play stanford, probably. UCLA, very surprisingly, did not make the tournament.

Florida State has a LOT of international players. I wonder if some of its ACC foes are getting annoyed with that, as the internationals tend to be a little older than the American players in their grade class, and all come to FSU with professional club experience. FSU started at least 4 internationals last year, and that is why, frankly, they won the national championship. This year FSU's three/four best players are from Europe (Ireland (2), Finland and Iceland). The individual named best player in the ACC tourney is a freshman FSU player from Finland--she'll be 20 soon, and has pro experience. Their best defender is a 22-year-old from Ireland--very good player. It's one thing to have 1 international--that's pretty common, we had Wilkinson--but when you've got 4-6 it can be a pretty significant advantage. You don't notice it so much because FSU's competition in the ACC is stout with unc and uva and notre dame--and FSU is really rather young this year after graduating a lot of players last year. Still, FSU has beaten very good UVA teams four out of the last five times they've played, and only lost this year in the regular season to UVA because one of its players unfairly received a red card (for a handball in the box). I haven't heard other ACC coaches complaining about it, maybe they don't think it's an issue, but the internationals do give FSU a noticeable edge, IMO.

I have noticed that while Pensky really seems to like play the 4-3-3 system, only Stanford, among all the other tops teams, favors that formation. Most of the other heavyweights pack the midfield--UNC typically plays 3-5-1; FSU plays 4-2-3-1, and UVA and UCLA tend to favor a 4-4-2 regularly. Everybody switches some, and Pensky played 4-4-2 in a couple of games earlier in the year. I think he should have stuck with that, but he went back to 4-3-3. Any formation can work if you've got excellent players in roles in which their talents can flourish, and the teams works together.

Great post armchair, enjoyed the read.

 

[armchair]

A weak first-round effort from the SEC. UNC Wilmington shuts out South Carolina, 2-0, and South Alabama thumps LSU, 4-0--embarrassing. So two teams out already.
Auburn and Florida win 1-0, and Texas A&M wins 2-1. (Does texas a&M play on a turf field; hard to tell on TV, but it looks like it--ball seemed more bouncy than you get with a grass field, and also odd in that the stands on one side of the field are very close to the field.) Auburn might win one more before playing top seeded and defending national champ florida state. Texas A&M must play #3 seed North Carolina--a good team that has been hurt by injuries this year. Speaking of the aggies, they apparently started 5 freshman and 3 sophs this year.

 

[MAD]

A weak first-round effort from the SEC. UNC Wilmington shuts out South Carolina, 2-0, and South Alabama thumps LSU, 4-0--embarrassing. So two teams out already.
Auburn and Florida win 1-0, and Texas A&M wins 2-1. (Does texas a&M play on a turf field; hard to tell on TV, but it looks like it--ball seemed more bouncy than you get with a grass field, and also odd in that the stands on one side of the field are very close to the field.) Auburn might win one more before playing top seeded and defending national champ florida state. Texas A&M must play #3 seed North Carolina--a good team that has been hurt by injuries this year. Speaking of the aggies, they apparently started 5 freshman and 3 sophs this year.

Ole Miss beat Murray State 1-0, so the SEC going 4-2 isn't bad.

 

[armchair]

Good day for the SEC in the NCAA tourney today. Auburn beat Texas Tech 3-2 to advance to the third round, where they now have a date with powerhouse Florida State. I'm not surprised Auburn has got this far as they've got a good team.

Also, Texas A&M upset North Carolina, winning 1-0 and limiting UNC to only 3 shots on goal. This result did surprise me. North Carolina has had serious injury problems this year--they lost 4 regular midfielders to season-ending injuries--and were playing a lot of backups. They struggled a bit to put Liberty away in the first round. Even so, I thought they had enough to beat a young Texas a&m team, but the aggies prevailed in a defensive struggle. I think the aggies are just a well-coached team; I think I said earlier that they start a lot of freshman and sophs, but then UNC was playing a lot of underclassman too.

It was not a good day for the ACC. In addition to the UNC loss, UConn beat notre dame 2-0. UConn had a good year but they don't play the competition that Notre Dame does and I'm quite surprised by this outcome. I saw Notre Dame beat an outstanding Virginia team (no. 1 seed) a few weeks ago at UVA, and they were impressive. But some days the game does not go your way.

I saw Stanford beat BYU last night 2-1 in an exciting, very fast-paced game. Wow--two excellent teams. BYU was 16-2-2 this year and didn't even get a 4 seed in this tournament. They gave Stanford--which probably gets more top recruits year in and year out than anybody-all they could handle. Stanford got a goal around the 70th/75th minute to go ahead. What was noticeable about Stanford, and BYU, too (a bit surprisingly) is how athletic they were at every position--and all the players are comfortable with the ball, and move well with the ball. I'm going to watch UVA play Southern Cal on Sunday (assuming UVA beats UNC Wilmington tonight); should be a good match!

 

[MAD]

Good day for the SEC in the NCAA tourney today. Auburn beat Texas Tech 3-2 to advance to the third round, where they now have a date with powerhouse Florida State. I'm not surprised Auburn has got this far as they've got a good team.

Also, Texas A&M upset North Carolina, winning 1-0 and limiting UNC to only 3 shots on goal. This result did surprise me. North Carolina has had serious injury problems this year--they lost 4 regular midfielders to season-ending injuries--and were playing a lot of backups. They struggled a bit to put Liberty away in the first round. Even so, I thought they had enough to beat a young Texas a&m team, but the aggies prevailed in a defensive struggle. I think the aggies are just a well-coached team; I think I said earlier that they start a lot of freshman and sophs, but then UNC was playing a lot of underclassman too.

It was not a good day for the ACC. In addition to the UNC loss, UConn beat notre dame 2-0. UConn had a good year but they don't play the competition that Notre Dame does and I'm quite surprised by this outcome. I saw Notre Dame beat an outstanding Virginia team (no. 1 seed) a few weeks ago at UVA, and they were impressive. But some days the game does not go your way.

I saw Stanford beat BYU last night 2-1 in an exciting, very fast-paced game. Wow--two excellent teams. BYU was 16-2-2 this year and didn't even get a 4 seed in this tournament. They gave Stanford--which probably gets more top recruits year in and year out than anybody-all they could handle. Stanford got a goal around the 70th/75th minute to go ahead. What was noticeable about Stanford, and BYU, too (a bit surprisingly) is how athletic they were at every position--and all the players are comfortable with the ball, and move well with the ball. I'm going to watch UVA play Southern Cal on Sunday (assuming UVA beats UNC Wilmington tonight); should be a good match!

I was surprised to see UNC lose. Looking forward to Duke vs Florida.

 

[armchair]

UNC lost five regulars to ligament (ACL) tears during the season, most in the last four weeks or so. Four were midfielders, and then they lost one of the better forwards to a knee injury early in yesterday's game. That clearly ruined UNC this year. I'm not taking anything away from texas a&m, which is a well coached group, but UNC was not the same team.

Ole Miss just finds ways to win. I think they had only 4 shots on goal against us and yet scored on two of them to win a match in which, as I recall, we had the better run of play. Last night they had only 2 shots on goal against Clemson, but put one in the net and seemed headed to victory until Clemson tied the game with less than a minute to go. Ole Miss then won it on penalties. Another well-coached team. Not a lot of great teams in the SEC , but a bunch of solid, well-coached groups.

Looking forward to seeing USC midfielder Morgan Andrews play tomorrow. She is stellar.

 

[armchair]

I'm shocked that both Stanford and UVA are out of the NCAA tourney. Both had the better run of play in their games--especially UVA--but they both got beat on penalty kicks. Rutgers, which beat Virginia, had something like 14 shutouts this year and only gave up 8 goals all year--excellent defensive team but not good offensively and they didn't really deserve to win, as UVA had the ball 80 percent of the game.

I'm curious to know why Aaron Parry, midfielder/forward, left UT before this past season, on the cusp of her senior season. Strange decision--and doubly so because she transferred to West Virginia, which has some very athletic forwards/midfielders and is a better team than we are right now. Did she think she was going to play more? That wasn't going to happen, and she apparently quit the mountaineers after a couple of games. Too bad as we certainly could have used her in our weak, thin midfield last year, I think. West virginia was 16-2-2 or somesuch, made it to the NCAA quarterfinals, where they just got beat by a very good pa. state team.

It's kind of depressing watching the best teams in the country play--you see how far we've got to go.

 

[MAD]

Final 4
Cary, NC

Semi-Finals
Dec 4
FSU vs Duke
Penn state vs Rutgers

Finals
Dec 6

 

[MAD]

I'm shocked that both Stanford and UVA are out of the NCAA tourney. Both had the better run of play in their games--especially UVA--but they both got beat on penalty kicks. Rutgers, which beat Virginia, had something like 14 shutouts this year and only gave up 8 goals all year--excellent defensive team but not good offensively and they didn't really deserve to win, as UVA had the ball 80 percent of the game.

I'm curious to know why Aaron Parry, midfielder/forward, left UT before this past season, on the cusp of her senior season. Strange decision--and doubly so because she transferred to West Virginia, which has some very athletic forwards/midfielders and is a better team than we are right now. Did she think she was going to play more? That wasn't going to happen, and she apparently quit the mountaineers after a couple of games. Too bad as we certainly could have used her in our weak, thin midfield last year, I think. West virginia was 16-2-2 or somesuch, made it to the NCAA quarterfinals, where they just got beat by a very good pa. state team.

It's kind of depressing watching the best teams in the country play--you see how far we've got to go.

Hannah Steadman also transferred from Tennessee to West Virginia.

 

[armchair]

My brother, daughter and I were planning to go to the College Cup, Mad, which isn't far away (I live in VA and my brother attended UVA)--and hoping to see four great teams--UVA, Stanford, Fla. State and Pa. State. And then Rutgers ruined it by beating UVA! And I'm doubly po'd because Rutgers is dull--all about defense, showed nothing in attack. And then a very impressive Stanford team also got beat in penalty kicks. So no final four! I saw Pa. State for the first time last night and they were very impressive against west virginia team--bottled up a very dangerous wva attack and, unlike Rutgers, aggressive in attack themselves. The Nittany Lions hardly put a foot wrong all night.

UT's back four was supposed to be our strength last year, and while it was solid, it is easy to see that we have a long way to go in terms of athleticism and composure in the back. The back three/four on the top teams are quick and confident with the ball, they can play it out of their own end instead of just kicking it away in a panic when challenged. I am hopeful for the Vols--Pensky is ratcheting up the talent level pretty significantly, but he needs to put a better team on the field next year.

 

[MAD]

My brother, daughter and I were planning to go to the College Cup, Mad, which isn't far away (I live in VA and my brother attended UVA)--and hoping to see four great teams--UVA, Stanford, Fla. State and Pa. State. And then Rutgers ruined it by beating UVA! And I'm doubly po'd because Rutgers is dull--all about defense, showed nothing in attack. And then a very impressive Stanford team also got beat in penalty kicks. So no final four! I saw Pa. State for the first time last night and they were very impressive against west virginia team--bottled up a very dangerous wva attack and, unlike Rutgers, aggressive in attack themselves. The Nittany Lions hardly put a foot wrong all night.

UT's back four was supposed to be our strength last year, and while it was solid, it is easy to see that we have a long way to go in terms of athleticism and composure in the back. The back three/four on the top teams are quick and confident with the ball, they can play it out of their own end instead of just kicking it away in a panic when challenged. I am hopeful for the Vols--Pensky is ratcheting up the talent level pretty significantly, but he needs to put a better team on the field next year.

I have been to a final four in Cary, NC and I think it is a great venue. I agree it's not fun to watch a team like Rutgers.

 

[Vol Soc Fan]

My brother, daughter and I were planning to go to the College Cup, Mad, which isn't far away (I live in VA and my brother attended UVA)--and hoping to see four great teams--UVA, Stanford, Fla. State and Pa. State. And then Rutgers ruined it by beating UVA! And I'm doubly po'd because Rutgers is dull--all about defense, showed nothing in attack. And then a very impressive Stanford team also got beat in penalty kicks. So no final four! I saw Pa. State for the first time last night and they were very impressive against west virginia team--bottled up a very dangerous wva attack and, unlike Rutgers, aggressive in attack themselves. The Nittany Lions hardly put a foot wrong all night.

UT's back four was supposed to be our strength last year, and while it was solid, it is easy to see that we have a long way to go in terms of athleticism and composure in the back. The back three/four on the top teams are quick and confident with the ball, they can play it out of their own end instead of just kicking it away in a panic when challenged. I am hopeful for the Vols--Pensky is ratcheting up the talent level pretty significantly, but he needs to put a better team on the field next year.

The best teams in the world are built from the back and while a level of athleticism is required, what is much more important is technical skills, poise on the ball, understanding shape and movement. PSU backs aren't superb athletes, nor are their mids, but they have superb skills, and do a great job of keeping the ball. When they gain possession they open up their shape superbly well and darn near all of their passes are made to players that aren't under pressure from defenders. I expect a PSU vs. FSU final.

 

[MAD]

Tennessee soccer's Kathryn Culhane and Michele Christy define what it means to be a student-athlete. Culhane and Christy are both engineering majors and both serve as the team's Student-Athlete Advisory Committee (SAAC) representatives. Check out the feature video by VFL Films above to learn more about how the two roommates continue to be successful on and off the field.


[youtube]http://youtu.be/SkxZB9u6avc[/youtube]

 

[MAD]

ECKEL & FERGUSON EARN NSCAA ALL-REGION HONORS

Eckel & Ferguson Earn NSCAA All-Region Honors - University of Tennessee Official Athletic Site

 

[armchair]

The best teams in the world are built from the back and while a level of athleticism is required, what is much more important is technical skills, poise on the ball, understanding shape and movement. PSU backs aren't superb athletes, nor are their mids, but they have superb skills, and do a great job of keeping the ball. When they gain possession they open up their shape superbly well and darn near all of their passes are made to players that aren't under pressure from defenders. I expect a PSU vs. FSU final.

I've watched Pa. state's last two games--against west virginia and rutgers--and they were nearly flawless in each game. Impressive--extremely well coached. It was good that there were able to take advantage of that rutgers mistake and score an earlyish goal; otherwise, it might have been another 0-0 score. And you are right: Pa. state is brilliant at finding open players, extremely well organized--they showed that against a /very/ athletic west virginia team. I think they do have some good athletes in midfield and a couple of players up front with very good pace. What is doubly remarkable about their back four is that they are 3 sophs and a freshman.

UT's back four was two seniors, a junior and a soph and not nearly good enough: the players were not technical enough and not composed enough. We need to improve technically, and I'll be curious to see who starts for this team next year. Not impressed by coaching decisions last year--formation, personnel. Marcano should have played tons more--crazy. We're a goal down to florida in the second half and the coach sticks with weak attacking personnel, including a holding mid who played the entire 90. The switches made for the S.C. game after Flynn's injury violated the rule that you never make more position changes than necessary. Examples....On to next year.

Florida State is a bit annoying with all their internationals--not because they have internationals, but because their coach has made Intls, the focal point of his program--5 starting last year and 5 this year. It's pretty common to have 1--but 5 is half your field team. The internationals are typically a year older than their U.S. counterparts--19/20-year freshman--and have pro experience in Europe. It is advantage, for sure--as evidenced by the fact that they've been bossing excellent uva and unc programs the last couple of years. However, as I write this, duke is beating fsu--scored against run of play. I hope they can prevail.