SheBelieves 2020

No, no, no...........no take backs, no clarifications.
I've already taken 2 screenshots of your post - framed one, the second is going in my Safety Deposit Box tomorrow in case my house burns down.

 

Ah, come on! At my age I am allowed a senior moment or three am I not? In a moment of weakness or in the flow of a conversation I am libel to forget what the subject under discussion is/was or even forget what language I am talking in.

You know how sometimes you can enter a room and forget why you went there? Well I can enter a room and forget what room it is.

I do not desire to take back posts, well not usually. But I will be as inconsistent as ever. I have no obligation to be consistent. I will stick with avoiding incontinence.

 

Some of us have gone past the point of senior moments and developed senior momentum...

 

They are just numbers.
SheBelieves Forwards, Midfielders, & Dunn

Goals/Game	Player	Games	Goals
0.42	Lloyd	291	122
0.42	Press	134	56
0.36	Williams	25	9
0.31	Rapinoe	165	51
0.29	Pugh	62	18
0.29	Lavelle	42	12
0.28	Mewis	64	18
0.24	Dunn	101	24
0.24	McDonald	17	4
0.22	Horan	83	18
0.20	Heath	165	33
0.19	Ertz	99	19
0.00	Sullivan	16	0

For reference Wambach was 0.72 GPG and Morgan is 0.63 GPG

 

I would think goals per minute would show a jump for those with a large number of sub appearances.

 

I'd prefer to see goals per minutes instead of goals per game.

 

Yep. Goals per game is pretty much meaningless. But rather than goals per minute I think goals per 90 minutes (or 45 or some other meaningful number) would be better. Goals per minute would be too small a number to mean much to most people. It also would be good to somehow remove meaningless minutes like a player coming into a match that is already 4-0 or more with only 5 or 6 minutes left.

I would also like "shots" to be counted more like in hockey. I know that shots on goal, which is the meaningful stat, are also counted but the shot attempts, no matter if they miss badly or not, are always displayed first and shots on goal are often not reported at all. A shot that misses the goal is worthless and should never be a positive stat at all. I also do not believe that blocked shots should be counted as shots.

I know it has always been that way but that does not make it right or even reasonable.

 

Like I said, they are just numbers. But anyway I worked out some more "pretty much meaningless" goals/game numbers for comparison:

Heinrichs 0.76, Akers 0.69, Hamm 0.55, Milbrett 0.49, Parlow 0.47, Leroux 0.45, Jennings 0.45, Lilly 0.37, MacMillan 0.34, Venturini 0.33, Pugh 0.29, Tarpley 0.26, Rodriguez 0.23, HAO 0.20.
So who belongs in the company of whom?
Doesn't 0.4 or better tell you something about a player's goal scoring productivity?

P.S. If someone want goals/minute, or minutes/goal , they need to dig out the data and crank the numbers.

 

On the field, Casey Short is so far and away better than Sonnet at defense it is laughable. Off the field goings on I cant comment on, but Short is leagues the superior soccer player.

 

Probably our best 1 on 1 defender-- but a turnover machine on offense. I'll take Sonnet, especially the way she's played lately.

Didn't we just do this-- feels redundant on both parts?

 

This is an incredibly useless stat. Especially when you consider the only players who have spent their entire careers as strikers AND starters were Morgan and Wambach. Lloyd and Rapinoe were mostly midfielders in their careers. Press' numbers are also pretty crazy for someone who spent most of her career coming off the bench and rarely playing striker.

 

"Most people use statistics the way a drunkard uses a lamp post, more for support than illumination." Mark Twain

 

Didn't we just do this-- feels redundant on both parts?[/QUOTE]

Hahaha, yes we probably have gone back and forth on this subject. I think Casey is the better soccer player, no doubt, but Emily is the better fit as far as personal dynamics. Not saying Casey isn't personable, but the cliches seems well established.

 

When I went to the US men's game versus Panama, there was a lot of parking available around the stadium. But that was a sellout.

Anyone know what they're going to do parking wise for the women's game Thursday?

 

Charge 50 bucks for the parking spot.

 

Correction:
Thursday in Orlando: 10,999 + Semb

 

I know I am probably overlooking the obvious but what is "Semb?"

 

Who all will be at the game in Orlando?

I will be there. If any of you want to meet and say hi, it would be cool.

 

Another poster.

 

Is this a serious response?

 

The stadium itself does not have public parking, or none that I have seen.

I go there every time the Red Stars play Orlando and I park one block away in Public Parking for $10. I'm hoping it doesn't go up for the USWNT game. Also, there will be many locals close and around the stadium with signs to park on their lawns. There is a Church about half a block from the stadium that I have parked at before. I'm guessing anywhere between $10 to $20 will be regular charge around the stadium. Hopefully not much more.

 

That's about the way it was the Men's game when I went.

Thanks.

 

What network or streaming service is /are carrying the non-USA shebelieves games? Thanks.

 

ESPN 3 has the non-US matches.