Stanford University 2012 [R]

Not related.

This one is a FIFA certified referee (USA)
http://www.examiner.com/article/q-a-2011-fifa-women-s-world-cup-referee-veronica-perez

They got a good crew for that match.

 

No, it's a different Veronica Perez. She is a FIFA-level assistant referee (AR), based in Northern California. Together with Kari Seitz (Northern California) and Marlene Duffy (Southern California) she officiated at the Olympics this past summer and the Women's World Cup last year. Veronica is relatively young (32), so she'll likely have many more World Cup and Olympics matches ahead of her. Kari, as you may know, is one of the top two or three female referees in the world and has participated in four World Cups -- something no other U.S. referee, male or female, and perhaps no referee in the world, has accomplished.

 

If you are planning to go to the Stanford womens game with Boston College on August 31 you may want to change your mind. Instead of free parking near the pitch you will have to park a long ways from the stadium. But they are compensating you for the long walk by charging $15 to park.

I like to get kissed before I get screwed but Stanford has forgotten the kiss.

http://www.gostanford.com/tickets/soccer-pg-parking.html?hq_e=el&hq_m=337402&hq_l=16&hq_v=eb05bd81c5

 

According to the "...tickets/soccer..." link, it appears that there is no charge if you park in Lot #9 Lasuen Grove before 4:00 pm (which is the scheduled start time for the soccer game). Also lots 11 & 12 will be open all day for soccer parking if space is available. However it may be tough to exit due to the (American) football game that starts at 7:00.

 

Stanford in second half with Penn State... I hope the Lions know that Stanford is a "second half" team. I wonder if they got the same speech in locker room that they got last week...

 

Shocking! IMO the team is adjusting to the new season and crew and will shortly be their old deadly selves as soon as Ubogagu gets back from Japan and the injured come off the bench. What really causes me worry (as much as a Santa Clara fan can worry about Stanford), is what will happen after all those world class senior defenders are gone next season...

 

Harsh words but what else can we expect after a weekend like that? To tell the truth, Friday's game was worse, especially for the defense. A few of the Card's more dependable players looked lost and error-prone vs. Penn State. Stanford's performance in Sunday's game could best be described as lethargic. The entire team looked like they were clad in leg irons. They went through the motions, sleepwalking through the game, exhibiting their patented ball-control style but without the punch that they've had in seasons past.

I hope Chi can come back and make a big impact. Surely playing the world's toughest competition at the U20 level will advance her play. She has proven to be a crafty scorer but the majority of her goals last year came against the team's lighter competition, the Florida State goal notwithstanding. Here's hoping she's ready to take the next step.

Verloo's absence was pointed to as a cause for concern but I haven't really seen much from her this year. She seems to be pressing. Wanting to score so badly that she fails to release to open teammates. The more you give, the more you get in soccer. You have to recognize when a teammate has a better shot than you do and give it up. I'm not seeing that so far.

I'd like to see LaBonta and Theuer get more of a shot. Both seem to have some talent and desire to play. In addition to being a good distributor, LaBonta showed she has a great shot from outside the 18.

I don't think that one bad game for the team is reason to dismiss the current batch of strikers. I think each of them has potential and there isn't much behind them at this point. I like Sydney's rocket shot, Nat's central runs and speed, and Taylor's effort and willingness to combine. They definitely have to improve their understanding of when it's time to share and when it's time to be selfish but don't give up on this group.

If Boston College goes poorly I'll be ready to sound the alarm with the rest of you but at this point I wouldn't panic. Most other teams suffer WTF losses, too. The 64-game unbeaten streak had to send some time!

 

I'm not sure you can say Courtney isn't a scorer. She did eclipse the 20 year old Oregon prep scoring record formerly held by Tiffeny Milbrett.

 

Cachundo can save time and just copy-paste his comments about the West Virginia game, for they apply so identically to tonight's BC game. What a big, fat mess. I don't understand the how's and why's of Stanford's drastic DNA change between December 2011 and August 2012, but the Cardinal is becoming a run-and-shoot, run-of-the-mill Division I team. And the coaching! Ratcliffe Gone Wild! I agree with Cachundo that the most bizarre case of Ratcliffe's weird personnel choices is the Bettinger headscratcher. Many fans in my section of the field also complained about Bettinger's nearly translucent ways. Having seen her play several times at the high school level, I suspected that she would be in over her head. BTW, regarding Cachundo's comment comparing Ratcliffe's commitment to Bettinger to his prior fixation with Allison McCann: During her four years at the Farm, Ratcliffe remained committed to Allison, aka The-Worst-Distributor-in-Stanford's-History. I personally think that irrational devotion to McCann eventually cost the team three championships. And now, he may...oops...do it again.

 

I disagree. Last night was much worse! Watched it in person and then rewatched much of the Pac-12 Network telecast. One of the things the commentators said that was spot on was Stanford failed to establish a rhythm the whole night. Very true. There were only flashes of the brilliant ball-control that has been the hallmark of Stanford's success.

West Virginia failed to break up Stanford's passing game. That was still there. A much more athletic Boston College side attacked that ball-control style and more or less smashed it to pieces with a sledgehammer. They wouldn't allow Stanford many opportunities to establish long periods of possession.

Well, yeah, but she's a freshman! There are very few out-of-the-box center mid's who can just come in and be amazing. It's a tough job. It's obvious that Ratcliffe knows she's not all the way there. The headscratcher is that wowow doesn't have a clue about developing athletes. Ratcliffe platoons Bettinger and LaBonta right now because that's what he has. He can't just clone Teresa Noyola so he has to do his best to give some playing time and experience to the qualified players that he has and hopes to develop into serviceable playmakers/distributors.

Since it's such a headscratcher to you, who would you or anyone on this forum who has an opinion substitute in that role? I'm not sure he has anyone suited to fill the prodigious gap left by Noyola. So he has to give someone the time and experience to figure it out and to coach them to address their shortcomings, however great or small those are.

Well, it's an Internet forum so no holds are barred I guess, but ouch. Pretty low to bag on a graduated player like that. Who's to say her role was what you think it was? She may have been on the field for different reasons. Take Z for example. What do you think her role was? She was a somewhat unorthodox soccer player but she had an important role: bring energy and scare the crap out o the other team with aggressive play. McCann was who he had at the time and while surely she had assets and deficiencies like any other player, I'm sure she had a role.

Last week I disagreed with Cachundo that the forwards were the worst players on the team. That's a cop out. Anyone can watch a team not score and blame the forwards. This team has nagging defensive and midfield issues that preclude any success the strikers are capable of having.

This is going to be an interesting year. This seems to be a reset year. Ratcliffe and the coaching staff have their work cut out for them. I look forward to seeing how our women come along over the course of the season. It will show what they and the coaching staff are made of.

 

Being a freshman is no excuse. Leidle, for example, is doing just fine. Bettinger isn't.

Ratcliffe develops players? Really? Let's be honest, what he develops are race horses (Press eg), while disdaining/misunderstanding/distrusting/however-you-want-to-characterize-it his creative players (Noyola, Birch, Stannard, etc.). Those three, for example, arrived with outstanding toolsets but, save Noyola, weren't ever given a real chance to consistently pull the strings. Even Noyola was regularly held back by Ratcliffe. A couple of years ago, her dad told me Ratcliffe referred to her as a "luxury" player who was useful under certain circumstances only. A funny opinion about arguably Stanford's brightest playmaker ever, don't you think? I've always thought Ratcliffe has a Jekyll-and-Hyde complex: Jekyll on the recruiting trail and Hyde on the bench.

[/QUOTE]Since it's such a headscratcher to you, who would you or anyone on this forum who has an opinion substitute in that role? I'm not sure he has anyone suited to fill the prodigious gap left by Noyola. So he has to give someone the time and experience to figure it out and to coach them to address their shortcomings, however great or small those are.[/QUOTE]

You're right, cloning Noyola is a nearly impossible task, but Ratcliffe has untapped potential wasting on the sideline. Also, it's not about cloning the magical Noyola, what the team needs is a creative midfielder who can sustain possession of the ball in the second third of the field and provide the front liners with clear options to goal. For example, fullback Liedle is no Levin clone, but she's filling the gap left by Levin with a personal and effective style. Like that, the team is flush with excellent playmaking middie options: McCann (Taylor!), (an exquisite HS player), Watkins, Rosen, La Bonta, even Quon. Any one of those, IMO, Ratcliffe could "develop" by just giving them some serious playing time. He needs to shed his fears and place some trust in what Cachundo calls the "puppeteers".

McCann's role was quite clear: win the ball and pass it back to a defender. Her back passing always limited options and put extra pressure on wingers and the other two middies to do all the playmaking. I would have preferred to see Z from day one four years ago. I'm sure there would have been growing pains, but I also think Z would have "developed" and blossomed into a more complete player than McCann (she did anyway!). And that difference would have given Stanford much better shots in the three Final Four games they lost.

 

midfield has been the biggest issue for 6 years. it seems we are always struggling to find someone. McCann played every minute her freshman year once she got a chance due to injuries and then he tried to replce her for the rest of her career,. but she served the purpose of defensive mid- be there, stop the ball and get rid of it. no one else could seem to do that so she won back her spot every year from whomever he wanted to put in. Z finally got her chance and proved to be better than everyone else that he had been trying to bring in .
noyola was the one player that fit the spot but he even fell out of like with her occasionally.
now the forwards and defenders caanot make up for that lack of effective linking . we lost almost all of our "difference makers" and those have not been replaced.
roster filled with decent players but not proving to be the same caliber as the last 4 years. he has to give them all a real chance to show what they can do and develop by tournament time ,if at all. they all have a high pedigree.
however that is not the coach's mode of operation generally. once labelled, players are stuck in a particular role. losing may make him change- finally. also, getting our scoring forward back will help a lot, but unless the ball gets forward in a meaningful and useful way, the forward does not matter much. give them time and experience and perhaps they will blossom like others have.

 

I don't mean to be too contrarian but Leidle has had her struggles, too. Long-term she's going to be great but I'm sure you've seen some of her errors during this season's games. Yes, she's doing fine but she makes mistakes that could be costly. Why? Because she's a freshman and freshman have some adjustments to make. Leidle's job is not as complex as the center mid's, though.

As much as the team misses Noyola's playmaking ability, they also miss defensive stalwart, Cami Levin. She was virtually unbeatable in the back. She almost never lost a 1v1. This year's crop makes mistakes and can't always overcome them. Cami had the speed and tenacity to regroup and get a second shot on the rare occasions that she made a mistake. Not so with this group so they need to do a better job of doubling up and backing each other up. They get caught flat footed sometimes and resort to stabbing too much. Gotta change that.

I can't speak for why Ratcliffe failed to properly utilize certain talented players over his time at Stanford but there are often reasons that we just don't have insight into. Bad practice habits, poor fitness, bad chemistry, so many reasons that we can't see. Not saying the coach doesn't make mistakes. Just suggesting that there are sometimes reasons we don't know about.

I think Ratcliffe, like any coach, has his shortcomings, but it's awfully hard to argue against a guy who's been in the final four for four years straight! He obviously knows what he's doing. And Stanford has recruiting limitations that other schools don't. You actually have to be a good student to get admitted! Stanford has actually denied admittance to players Ratcliffe has recruited. You just wouldn't see that at Cal, UCLA, or most other places.

Z was a great kid and a fireplug but I don't think she was the missing link to lost championships.

 

Also great students at Cal and UCLA. Some would argue that this actually allows Stanford more leverage. If a coach changes his mind about a player, it is quite convenient to say to that family that it was impossible to get through admissions. Actually, some would argue that Stanford will find a way for the players that it really wants, as do other institutions. I know of a family who to this day wonder if they really couldn't get through admissions, or did Paul change his mind on their kid.

 

Cal and UCLA will accept a sub-3.0 GPA student. In fact, some even below 2.5. Stanford would be hard pressed to admit a student on the women's soccer team if her GPA was below 3.5.

I know of a player on Cal's roster right now who had a sub-2.5. And that's at arguably the finest public university in the country. I know of a top player on UCLA's roster who Stanford could not even attempt to recruit because of her high school academic performance.

There are great students at Cal and UCLA to be sure. A kid applying to either of those schools better have a 4.0+ if he/she expects to have a decent chance of getting in. But those two schools will make significant exceptions to land a top athlete. Stanford won't.

 

One measure is APR, which the NCAA uses.

Stanford falls near the top percentiles for NCAA soccer programs. CAL is somewhat lower. UCLA ranks in the 20-30% range of all D1 women's soccer programs.

Another measure is the number of academic all Americans each program has produced.

Here is a list compiled by Notre Dame:

 

With a stealthy defensive setup, Boston U. was a tough nut to crack last night at Cagan Field. The Cardinal was saved from overtime only because of a keeper screamer at the end of regulation. Still, despite the dismal offensive output on both ends of the field, I actually enjoyed Stanford soccer for the first time this year.

Ratcliffe made three good adjustments before and during the game. First, he finally started LaBonta, a legitimate creative midfielder who brought a breath of fresh air to the flow of the offense. Second, he subbed Rosen in as a target forward and gave her a whole half to show some of her creative attributes, which she did, even though her pace is way too slow. Still, Rosen and LaBonta are the most creative players on the team, and it was good to see Ratcliffe give them a fair shot. Third, Ratcliffe used Quon's versatility (reminded me of Levin) to breakdown Boston's defense. It worked.

The defense continues to gel nicely, although I still want to see Theuer-Garciamendez as starting CB's. Both Theuer and Romine are much better complements to Garciamendez than Thompson, who was the weakest link in the back. Offensively, off-ball movement improved, especially from the forwards who tracked back effectively most of the night. Even though the team continued to struggle with execution in the second third of the field, the players did better looking for open seams and overlaps. This should improve when Ubogagu returns next week. Now that Ratcliffe has finally put together an acceptable midfield, I think the offense should get more and better scoring options with Ubogabu's skill and pace at the top.

 

Stanford soccer is back! With style and superior athleticism, Stanford dismantled the vastly overrated Hoyas on a beautiful day at the Farm. There's really very little to complain about after this tremendous exhibition by the Cardinal.

Everyone showed up and team chemistry was much improved with today's lineup. The defense was rock solid, captained by the steady hand of the best CB of all times, Garciamendez. Quon and Liedle were great outlets and although I still think Thompson will struggle with faster and smarter forwards, the backline today was impenetrable. Happily, the midfield is finding its groove, with Nogueira providing the brawn (and goals!!) and LaBonta the brains. At last, Ratcliffe is letting LaBonta play, she is is this team's puppeteer and Ratcliffe should give her the minutes she needs to pull strings consistently and confidently. I was also happy to see Rosen start. She complements LaBonta well and with Uboagagu back in the mix next week, the front line will have the depth to score enough goals to make another big run to the College Cup.

With renewed confidence, I can't wait for conference play to start. But before that, the team has to be careful with San Diego State next weekend in Santa Clara.

 

Looking forward to the matchup with undefeated San Diego State. I'm not sure what to make of them yet. For the most part, their schedule hasn't been that tough. The Pepperdine win seemed noteworthy, but a closer look at Pepperdine's performance this season tells us that this year the Waves might not be the same team that has been such a thorn in UCLA's side in recent years.

Still, 7-0 is 7-0. The Aztecs have to be taken seriously. Should be a good game but I expect the Cardinal to come out on top!

 

Stanford defeated a legitimate San Diego State squad last night. The Aztecs play a typical southern California game and represented themselves well. After falling behind in H1, SDSU played a very spunky H2 and got several good looks at goal. But I'm no longer much of a fan of the amorphous swarming soccer played in the southern hinterlands, where I spent many years watching and coaching (cheering, btw, for a hated nemesis of today: the baby-blue weenies), so I was happy to see the Cardinal bend but not break in H2.

The ride home on the wowow van was filled with conflicting chatter. Mrs. wowow and little wowow were upset with Stanford's offense. Having watched the team evolve from a mediocre ho-hummer a few years ago into a fantastic juggernaut and national champion, they always expect the Cardinal to display electric passing and create one goal option after another. Yours truly, on the other hand, thought Stanford played rather well, considering how deep they were stepping in it a couple
of weeks ago. Tactically, the Cardinal is primed to go a long way again with Ratcliffe's 4-3-3 formation. It fits his talent pool and the formation gives great freedom to versatile players like Quon and Ubogagu.

The backliners again held the fort. Romine started instead Thompson and did quite well (certainly better than the last two years), although I would still like to see how a Theuer-Garciamendez partnership would look like. Quon, Garciamendez and Liedle may be the most technically proficient defensive trio in the nation and they compacted spaces as a group so well that at times it appeared they were executing a choreographed dance. To boot, they always gave each other multiple release options.

The midfield again did better with the LaBonta-Doll tandem sharing playmaking duties. Nogueira is great on defense and she's ferocious on set pieces, but moving the ball forward on the ground is NOT her forte. She should always leave that role to the other two. Last night, Doll's threaded passes and LaBonta's subtle intelligence and technique feeding ball after ball to the frontline kept the Cardinal's offense credible.

Up top, Ubogagu brought some new spark to the frontline with her speed and creative toolset, but she still needs time to blend in. She will be the team's gamechanger for the next three years and should be running on all cylinders pretty soon. I just hope that she models her game more and more after O'Hara (the best ever) and less and less after Press (or even Taylor). Press did have a fantastic output but she was also a fantastically inefficient player who drained the team from a lot of its versatility, and her self-centered style proved to be very costly in all those lost finals. Ubogagu could become one of Stanford's greatest, but she has to resist the temptation to try to do everything herself. Verloo is the other extreme, she's unselfish to a fault, so I was happy to see her score. The team needs a free kick specialist and Verloo strikes the ball with great pace and placement. Even though Rosen had a quiet night, I am not too concerned with her lack of pace. Verloo and Ubogagu provide enough turbo power to keep backlines honest, and Rosen has superior vision, off-ball movement and technique. Griffen and Payne, for example, are much faster players, but they are grossly inefficient and, imo, serve the team best coming off the bench, like Ratcliffe played them tonight.

The team will begin conference play next weekend with renewed confidence and a pretty good record given its confusing and rocky start. Not a bad place to be.

 

Interesting game last night. Stanford escapes with a 1-0 victory playing an elephantine, stodgy game that baffles the mind. Gone is the relentless, fast, and constantly forward attacking style that was in place when O'Hara, Press, and Riley paced the field. In place of it is a slow, meandering, and virtually fruitless approach to the game in which endless passing along the back line is called "patience" and set plays are now the bread and butter of its scoring ability. The Card got lucky to get a free kick just outside the 18 that Verloo skillfully placed in the top shelf. Without that call, Stanford ties or possibly loses a game it could have easily dominated with a more aggressive attack.

Soccer is game best played with speed and pressure. Speed can't be taught and pressure creates mistakes by the opposition. Japan's WNT plays the game beautifully with these two assets. With no 6-footers to speak of, they control the game with ball movement, skill, and unselfish distribution in the attacking third of the field. Scoring happens because the speed of play and skillful movement of the ball creates chaos for a defense. It becomes unmanageable when one player after another foregoes a selfish crack at the goal in lieu of a quick survey of the field and a crisp pass to a more open player. When you don't know where the score is coming from, your chances of defending are reduced significantly. This selfless style is what made last year's Stanford team, devoid of superstars, so successful.

This year's team shows little chemistry and too much selfishness. Selfish play and lack of imagination prevents this team from scoring non-set play goals. Athletic teams like BC expose them. I believe it will be the Card's achilles heel in the tournament when they play an athletic side like Duke, FSU, BC, or even OSU.

I have to give Ratcliffe credit. He has done a great job of recruiting strong players when he has a somewhat more limited talent pool to choose from due to more stringent academic standards. However, I think he lacks imagination as a coach. The style I saw his team play with three years ago was a mirage. Regressing to a slow, plain vanilla style like this will work fine against UNC Greensboro on Sunday or your the run-of-the-mill Pac-12 teams (UCLA notwithstanding) but once we get out of our West Coast comfort zone, we're going to be in trouble.

San Diego State's attack was pretty instructive. It reminded me a lot of those O'Hara/Press days albeit with downgraded individual ability. The Aztecs showed they could possess the ball and their players showed skill and tenacity by creating several dynamic chances throughout the game. If their staff finds a way to attract more talent, I would expect to see big things from this program. They play a good brand of soccer. I wish the Cardinal did, too.