The Portland site changed. There will be no broadcast in CA. You'll have to actually trudge down to Drake Stadium to see the game.
Yes. That's correct. I posted the changes I'm aware of on the NCAA Tournament thread but it's a good idea to mention it here as well. Of course it's definitely worth "trudging down to Drake" to see the game, but by not being aired on the Bay area Comcast affiliate, it unfortunately means that DirecTV and Dish subscribers around the country also won't be able to see it. Unless they know something that no one else here has figured out, or if they have a local cable system that somehow carries Comcast's Oregon affiliate (Comcast Sportsnet Northwest).
Emphasis mine. well, so how true did that turn out to be?!! Larsen scored the tying goal against Portland with 8 minutes left! Now, it was all set up by Cheney, who put on a MVP-type performance in the clutch, but still Larsen's goal is the kind of opportunity that seems to go astray when a striker is struggling and has lost confidence. Instead she has confidence and her teammates have confidence in her. How's this for confidence-building? Larsen is tied with Danesha Adams for most UCLA goals in this post-season with three! Well, here it is - Danesha Adams and Val Henderson's and the other seniors' last home game as UCLA players. My first UCLA game was in 2004 when they burst on the scene as freshmen. I can hardly believe it. Tomorrow's game and the College Cup are the end of a little era for me in women's soccer.
BruinEPL discovered that the game will be on DirecTV after all, channel 656. Is it all parts of the country? I don't know but I think that's the way it works on the satellite systems. See BruinEPL's post in the TV thread (stickied above).
UCLA wins against Portland in second overtime on Danesha Adams header off corner. Final score was UCLA 3 - 2 Portland. Best game of the season, by far. I thought that the bruins had met their match against a great team with speed and excellent players in every position. It took a while for UCLA to find their feet, and Portland scored first, but Danesha created her own opportunity, receiving a pass with her back to the goal, turning and dribbling 3 - 4 players and finishing. A magic goal. The Bruins went ahead on a Kara Lang header, then Portland tied the score in the closing minutes of the game on a shot off a poorly cleared corner. Portland gave UCLA trouble with headers all night, they were very dangerous around the goal. It was a very exciting game. Though the field was wet, it didn't rain during the actual playing of the game, although it did during halftime. All in all two hours well spent (not counting the 2.5 hours to get there and the 1.5 hours home). Looking forward to Texas. Three of the four teams from last year will be there again, two from the ACC and two from the Pac10.
I'm a Pilots fan, but I will give credit where real credit is due. UCLA has a great team, but their best asset is their brilliant coach, Jillian Ellis. She completely out-coached Garrett Smith. A rare bad, sloppy field at Drake - and yet Ellis was smart enough to quickly sub freely and often in these conditions. Playing on mud depletes a player's energy much faster than on dry grass. On the other hand, Garrett did not make his first sub until 20-some minutes into the second half after losing the lead - while the Bruins had already made EIGHT substitutions! The Pilots simply died the rest of the game - they were incredibly lucky to tie the game in regulation with only 68 seconds left. And after the 5-minute break and a 7-minute surge by the Pilots in the first overtime, they were ready to be stuck with a fork. Only the outrageously outstanding saves by the Portland goalkeeper - probably the only Portland player who was not exhausted - kept UCLA subs from finishing the Pilots off in the first OT.
Five straight College Cups - she's doing something right and it can't be just recruiting. Oddly though, as someone who has defended Coach Ellis from some of the routine criticism of her, I have found some of her recent strategic decisions to be... well, interesting... Actually rather bold and I'm not at all sure conventional. The substitutions seemed to make sense, however, and I think UCLA benefited from them and Portland's lack of them. I don't want to make the mistake of calling UCLA-Portland the "championship game." I think all four teams that made it in are worthy teams that have battled through adversity. They all deserve to be there.But I don't think it would be wrong to say that Portland would clearly also make a worthy Final Four team, and but for the luck of the draw (or lack of it), UCLA and Portland would both be in the College Cup. I admire their team, their players, and the support they get from their fans. On another note, I wonder if there should be some kind of viewing party for the semi-final with USC, for all 5 of us, you know, that seem to support the Bruins. I'm thinking of maybe calling the Athletic Department about it on Monday - I mean, especially against USC you'd think there'd be at least some interest on campus.
Any rumor to that effect is a complete and utter falsehood...! To think that I would attempt such spectacle-making knowing that some of the Portland Purple Pilots Drum Crew was flying down to Westwood for the game is a transparent absurdity(!)
An interesting quote (or paraphrase) and Portland fan comments, again from the Pilot Nation website that I've been checking out lately: The Pilot fans may be a little too complimentary; on the whole, I think (and others at the game thought) that Portland's speed and quickness was the equal of UCLA's. With quick little crossing plays, they challenged our outside backs and got the ball to the line numerous times. It was from a play like that, taking it to the line, that Portland got its first goal. Tsao (I believe) took it to the line and sent a pass back out in front of the goalmouth (I want to use the hockey term, the crease) that Val couldn't intercept: it's an open net at that point. The Pilot fans are wondering how UCLA came to dominate the 2nd half (and overtime). Good question. As with a few other recent games, I haven't figured it out fully either and maybe it's just as well - with any luck the other side will continue to have a hard time figuring it out. But I like what Coach Ellis apparently said (apparently because I'm relying on a paraphrase) about "personality." UCLA, under Ellis, always seems to have players with distinct personality in their play and that's always been attractive to me. Portland has that, too, I think; if I had the chance to see them more I think it would stand out more for me. I also liked this quote from the Bruins' website where Danesha Adams talks about her sudden-death goal against former teammate Kelsey Davis:
Kolabear, I don't think that this Pilot fan was too complimentary (I read the Pilot Nation post). Portland is not as fast--athletic fast--as UCLA. However, they are very quick and skilled. The two teams play a different style of soccer. Portland plays more small ball and they do it well and are very dangerous. They thrive off of overlapping and diagonal runs in small areas. Their dominance in the last 15 minutes of the first half exemplified their preference of attack. Without UCLA playing hard team defense with the midfielders and forwards tracking all the way back to the box to defend, Portland took their time to get to the box and then executed their attack. This is Portland's game. They supplement this attack with long through balls to a couple of their fastest forwards. For the most part, this part of their attack was thwarted by Hardy's speed in the back. Henderson really didn't have to deal with breakaways from midfield like she did a year ago. It was more small ball that highly pressured the Bruins in the first half. Once UCLA began playing their aggressive team defense again in the second half, the Bruins began to dominate the play. Why? Because UCLA's style and talent favors a quick attack. How many times do we see UCLA this year getting the ball at midfield (as a result of defending) and attacking with either DiMartino, Cheney, Lang or Adams with the ball or making runs. It's been a pleasure to watch UCLA this year with so much talent on the field clicking. It is true that UCLA has diversified its attack this year with possession ball, but the Bruins are always dangerous with the quick attack. Frankly, I was surprised at the press Portland received this year in the hype for the game. They made a great run this year after losing to UCLA and SC, but they did so against a weaker schedule than UCLA (it was a weaker WCC this year). They indeed improved since the UCLA regular season game, but just about everyone commenting on the game to be played seemed to forget that UCLA got a lot better. Although Portland is very talented, they are just not the same team without the Rapinoe sisters. The Portland fan said as much. UCLA didn't really have to worry about the shot from outside the box. Well, last year, that's how Rachel Rapinoe scored. From the second half on, it was the UCLA team we expected and they dominated Portland. There's just no WCC team that has UCLA's attack, nor did Portland face competition even close to UCLA in the first, second and third rounds of the NCAAs, as the Portland fan said. Portland has a fantastic soccer tradition and I respect them greatly. But this was not a Portland team from the past, and the same can be said of UCLA. ________________ Another character building win for the Bruins. I'd prefer them to not fall behind early, but it certainly has built character and confidence. The game should not have gone into overtime. Kelsey Davis, ex-Bruin and Portland keeper had the game of her life. Many of her saves could be put on a poster. It easily could have been 5-1 or 5-2. I thought all the players had good games. The team played well (except for that last 15 minutes of the first half). On offense, Cheney was solid and persevered in playing every minute of the game. DiMartino got one assist and was effective offensively, but not as much as usual on defense (given that she was subbed out late in the game and through both overtime periods, I think she must not have been at 100%). Lang and Adams had very effective games and scored the 3 goals. And doesn't that say a lot about how many weapons UCLA has in its arsenal? Cheney and Larsen score last week with Cheney kind of taking over the game to get the tie and win, and Lang and Adams take over this week after having not so effective games last week. Adams in particular exerted her will on the game. Both of her goals were impressive with the game winning header being one of the more powerful headers you'll see. Lang's header was impressive but in a different way. A great pass from DiMartino but from not so far away. Lang headed it with power to get it past a stretched out keeper. The Portland site said this goal was a lucky bounce, but it was sheer talent by DiMartino and Lang with a lucky ricochet. That's how it's been going for the Bruins. I also thought McCall and Barnes played well in midfield, as did the backline once the team defense reappeared. Wimoth, Cook, Hardy, Calvert, and Wall all worked hard at keeping the Pilots off the board after the first score, with Wilmoth participating in the offense (getting an assist on Lang's header). It's fun to watch this UCLA team. If they bring their "A" game Friday, they'll be tough to beat, but they should not take SC lightly. The Trojans seem to be on their own magic journey. Go Bruins!
I said it early and I'll agree with myself now (laughter) I think this is UCLA's year. For so long, they have had the talent to win it, this is the first Bruin team I have ever seen that has the attitude...almost a chip on their shoulders. This is the first Bruin team that doesn't let up. They may not be playing well, but they keep coming at you. I am a huge bruin fan, but have not been a Jillian fan, as her teams have been so la-de-da every year....no sense of urgency or killer instinct. This year, that is not the case at all. Not at all. I credit the players for ramping up their effort and intensity in every game. They are fun to watch and fun to cheer for. Hope it continues for 2 more!
#1 UCLA Bruins celebrate 3-2 overtime quarterfinal victory over Portland en route to their fifth consecutive NCAA College Cup appearance.
Well, hell, of course that hurts. But I'm still proud of this team and glad that people around the country could see some of the qualities that make UCLA one of the elite teams in the country, displaying some of the personality in the play that help make college soccer at the top level a truly outstanding sport. But soccer's like that sometimes... Val Henderson had a fine game and made some excellent saves) especially on some blistering free kicks) but Kristin Olson has just been on an incredible hot streak. And fans of Amy Rodriguez just must be thrilled to see her put aside 2+ years of frustration at the college level to just put it all together and make it click in two moments of magic for USC. But what a bitter pill...
FWIW, (and not much) I thought you were the better side today, hands down. I thought the trait that made UCLA elite this year, laying on the gas, really didn't materialize. They were in complete control of that game, but seemed to let up and let USC breathe. Regardless, and this sounds like many of the Tarheel nuts on this board, regardless of results today, UCLA was, IMO, the cream of the crop this year. Too bad it didn't shake out that way.
What a nightmare... Both losses in Texas, in both UCLA dominates in the first half and then eases up and gives up two goals. This loss to USC, again what a nightmare. But I'm with kolabear. I'm proud of this team and they've been a blast to watch this season. Just not in the second half tonight. I feel really bad for the players who left their heart and game out on the field.
Something is definitely lacking in preparation and game adjustments. DA did not look like her normal self. Team looked unfit. And nobody marking Arod on the last goal. And the looks on the coaches faces the last 15 minutes said it all. Too much talent to come up short SIX times in a row.
I have to agree based on what we could see. Jillian did not seem to get off her seat and make adjustments. She sat there and looked dumbfounded when USC tied and subsequently took the lead. Most coaches could take UCLA to the final four. Special ones have the cajones to win championships. Ellis has had plenty of opportunities and continues to miss the big one. The common denominator over the years is Jillian. To lose to her rival neighbor has got to scare the begeezers out of her. If Ali has put USC on the proverbial final four map Jillian will be looking more and more like a failure to the bruin brethen. She will have to up her work quality if Ali wins the Championship before UCLA ever gets one.
Well, I'm still a neophyte when it comes to web etiquette but coming on to the UCLA thread with superficial comments like this when our emotions are still raw sure sounds like trolling to me. At the risk of feeding the trolls, I'm going to point out the superficiality of these remarks. "Definitely lacking in preparation and game adjustments"? - Who in their right mind can suggest we didn't look like we belonged out there on the field? And getting to that game, do you think we had some kind of a cakewalk getting there? Virginia? Portland? Even OK State for a 2nd round game - compare it to some of the other matchups out there. "Team looked unfit"? Yeah we got through Virginia and Portland by being unfit. Yeah, we dominated USC so badly in the first half they were lucky to be not down three goals, and we did that by being unfit. "Too much talent to come up short SIX times in a row" - This one hurts because of course we had the talent this year, lots of it. But you look at those teams from 3, 4, 5 years back and what was so superior about UCLA's talent compared to the North Carolinas, the Portlands, the Notre Dames, and the Santa Claras that have been established in women's soccer for at least a decade more than UCLA?
Rookie - see my reply to VechiaSignora. The gist of it applies to you, too. I think it's quite a cheap shot of you, a Portland fan, to come on here like this and insinuate that our coaches can't coach and can't make adjustments a scant week after UCLA made halftime adjustments against Portland and totally dominated the 2nd half and overtime of their game. Now, as I said in another thread, I'm glad you discovered the Portland women's soccer team. It's a fine program and well worthy of support and loyalty and I respect that. It would be nice if you could return the courtesy and show a minimum of respect to those of us on BigSoccer who are UCLA fans. Thank you.
I can appreciate your post, and of course anybody can talk with the final score on hand. Had UCLA finished a second chance early on we would not be having this discussion, but since they didn't and wound up losing the game, it allows for people like myself to have opinions on the matter. And had they finished a second or third chance they might have afforded to have played the second half the way they did. I love the soccer that UCLA played this season, but the question is why could they not get the result when they clearly had the better side? Not sure if they were always the better side all these years in the College Cup, definitely not last season, but the fact that they have been there all these times says a lot about their quality. In my opinion, and let me state that the result frustrates me as much as you, USC looked like the fitter team (that might have been a better statement to make, I admit). I stand by the talent comment, nobody in the country has the likes of Adams, Lang, DiMartino, and Cheney in their lineup. Preparation and adjustments: In the biggest game of the year, UCLA allowed USC to grab the momentum after halftime. I don't know what you call that, adjustment or preparation issue (coming out of halftime). UCLA should have kept imposing themselves on the game like they did in the first half. It looked to me that they lacked the resolve as a group to accomplish that, for whatever reason (past results, pressure, etc.). Maybe after dominating USC so thoroughly in the first half and finally getting a goal the team thought it might be easier in the second half. OF COURSE THEY BELONG. They were an outstanding team, and they were also well coached all year long. Of course you don't get to this point and get by Portland and Virginia with talent alone. It just seems to me that just maybe a pattern has developed in the College Cup for UCLA.
In that spirit, yes it is worth discussing on the UCLA thread, if not by me, then by you and others. How often is it that soccer is a game of two halves, at least when you're talking about very good teams? In UCLA's three preceding tournament games (even the 2nd round game against Oklahoma State), there was quite a difference between the 1st and 2nd halves, and fortunately UCLA came out much stronger in the 2nd half of all those games. I didn't think UCLA played that badly in the 2nd half, certainly they weren't dominated by USC in the 2nd half as much as the other way around in the 1st half (what I saw of it. I missed the first 20 minutes of it.) But it certainly became more of the kind of game that USC needed to play if they were going to win: more possession, disruption of UCLA's offense, set pieces. That last one especially is important even if it means set pieces on both sides - because that's where USC is strongest. They're strong in the air. Defending against set pieces, they're able to make sure they're organized defensively. It plays to their strength. It still took some great goaltending by USC's Kristin Olson in the 2nd half. UCLA didn't have nearly as many opportunities of course in that half but they still had a few incredible ones - I remember Olson tracking one blast with her right hand and palming it over the net to her left. Ummm, I've been trying to avoid making a big deal about it because the losing side always complains about it, but yes, for the sake of completeness, yes I believe the refereeing had something to do with it. USC got much more physical with their defense in the 2nd half, and they're fine with being called for it. But geez, if they're barely even going to be called for it... well, heck, they're in their 7th heaven. And up until USC went up 2-1, how many calls were going against USC? How many more free kicks was USC getting as opposed to UCLA? USC goes up 2-1 and suddenly the referee pulls out a yellow on USC and suddenly UCLA starts getting free kicks near the area. But those aren't UCLA's strong suits, not in the clutch. Having said all that, yes I fear what you say may now be coming true - a pattern of not winning the big one in the College Cup, a psychological block of some kind, a fear of failure. It's what a lot of the evil-wishers on BigSoccer have been saying for a while. As BruinEPL pointed out in the NCAA thread, a UCLA fan could dismiss that up to now. But with this game... On the bright side, if a Pac-10 team can win it all, UCLA can, too. Also on the bright side, hot goalies sometimes cool off the next time around (cf Ducks Jean-Sebastien Giguere).
Thanks vechiasignora for your clarifying comments. I appreciate what kolabear had to say too. It's easy given UCLA's lack of a title for so many to say, six college cups and no titles. But as I said elsewhere, each year can be explained but this one, perhaps. Every other year, the Bruins weren't the best team in the nation. They lost to UNC and Portland the last two years and those two teams were clearly the best. This year it was UCLA. They proved that against SC overall, and certainly against the toughest draw of all the #1 seeds. SC found a way to win ugly and that's soccer. That's how lesser talented teams beat better ones--pack it in, equalize the talent by tough physical play (remember Florida's defeat of UNC in the 90's?), hope for the quick strike, and bank on set pieces. The coaching staff didn't lose this game. As you said, if they put away their chances in the first half, UCLA probably wins the title. Is that Jillian's fault? I'd give SC's keeper a good portion of the responsibility for that. I don't know why it has worked out this way for UCLA. But Jillian and her coaches have put the players in a position to play for a title in each of the last five years. Who else can say that? SC can't. Sure they have the title now, but after years of underachieving soccer. UCLA will be back. Why do I know that? Because this coaching staff finds a way to get back to the final four every year. Go Bruins!
I don't know about the ref-ing, but the major adjustment SC made in the second half was to take DiMartino out of the game. Cheney too. Ask the players about it. SC got physical, and it worked. Unfortunately, it's part of soccer, and it's the type of game the SC coach plays. I guess this is what SC soccer will be about. For me, I'm a Bruin soccer fan. As you've pointed out before, I like their style, their personality and their soccer tradition. It was a hell of a year. They gave us quite a ride. I don't know why this has happened to UCLA or the coaching staff, but as I've said elsewhere, this is the only year that UCLA was the best team in the nation. It didn't work out, but this coaching staff has put UCLA in a position to win it for five straight years. That's something special. Yes, it was disappointing to lose, but UCLA will continue to be an elite team playing an elite type of soccer along with UNC, Portland, Santa Clara, and Notre Dame. Go Bruins!