2011 UNC Tarheels

Discussion in 'Women's College' started by UNC4EVER, Dec 15, 2010.

  1. cpthomas

    cpthomas BigSoccer Supporter

    Portland Thorns
    United States
    Jan 10, 2008
    Portland, Oregon
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    In relation to the expectation or hope that UNC will return to (continue with) its past dominance of DI women's soccer, I recommend a reading of Stephen J. Gould's book Full House (Three rivers Press 1996). In it, he writes about this kind of expectation or hope -- in part in the context of why we won't see any more .400 hitters in baseball. What he refers to is "the rise in general excellence and consequent shrinkage of variation."

    Perhaps AD understands this better than some fans and therefore is in the process of adapting?
     
  2. leftout1

    leftout1 Member

    Mar 15, 2010
    Club:
    AC Milan
    "Barcelona and Arsenal are two teams known for their passing capabilities. And two teams that Anson watches religiously, and takes drills from for the team to use. Sadly, you can't take a bunch of track stars and expect them to be Messi's, Villa's, Van Persie's, Walcott's, etc."

    I apologize if I am confused (doesn't always take much...) but are you equating Barcelona's/Arsenal's style of play with recent editions of UNC?:cool:
     
  3. casocrfan

    casocrfan Member

    Nov 25, 2004
    San Francisco
    Let me get this straight.... UNC wins back to back titles as recently as 08 and 09 and the program needs to get back to it's winning ways? Wow.
     
  4. OnSecondThought

    OnSecondThought New Member

    Nov 23, 2011
    Club:
    --other--
    No I was not, rather it was to contrast the two vastly different playing styles.
     
  5. leftout1

    leftout1 Member

    Mar 15, 2010
    Club:
    AC Milan
    Thanks and I agree. It seemed a bit contradictory for the coach to have them use training drills from a playing style that is the polar opposite of how UNC plays.:cool:
     
  6. OnSecondThought

    OnSecondThought New Member

    Nov 23, 2011
    Club:
    --other--
    It is more to try to incorporate technical aspects such as better passing into UNC's style.
     
  7. footie4life

    footie4life Member

    May 24, 2011
    NYC
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    Nigro was actually fully fit by mid season.
     
  8. footie4life

    footie4life Member

    May 24, 2011
    NYC
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    Yes! You are both singing my song.
     
  9. footie4life

    footie4life Member

    May 24, 2011
    NYC
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    Yes!. Add another voice to the choir.

    May I add at this point it is no surprise that two of the final four (FSU and Stanford ) are well known to employ a possession style of soccer while Duke and Wake utilize what I believe to be the very best combination of possession and direct styles.

    As I have been saying all season, possession based soccer is the future of Women's soccer and it would seem that the future is now.
     
  10. UNC4EVER

    UNC4EVER Member

    Sep 27, 2007
    True, that. :) But, yeah, we kinda really do. UNC in its worst year ever is still a program to be proud of, but that is not what some of us are seeing/talking about. See below.

    OR not. The fastest path to a win is a straight line to the goal. The reason men don't play this style is cause they can't. The opponents are too good. Those posters who think this moment has arrived in women's college soccer are watching a different game than what I've been seeing. I am very proud that three ACC teams are headed to the NCAA final. I've seen them all play this year, and they are playing some excellent soccer! That said, they are not playing better than UNC has played in the past. The best of them are playing at around UNC's recent traditional level. UNC is not in GA because this year the team played significantly worse than normal. Further, one excellent year for a few ACC teams (and non-ACC teams) does not mean that the landscape for women's college soccer is changed forever.

    Some long-time posters on this thread have done an excellent and exhaustive job of discussing the reasons for UNC's problems (which rose to a level of concern in 2010). There are first order and second order problems, and we have nagged them all to death.

    I was not alone in predicting the outcome of this season back in 2010 and being correct gives me no pleasure. I am sure other loyal (but not blind) fans are similarly ambivalent. We face some of the same first order problems going into 2012, with the result that we will (IMO) have a similar season: 2012 will be a good year for Tarheel fans, but we just won't quite get over the hump in the most important games. AD could change the calculus of this team, but he won't. The fact that these issues have been identified, discussed and remain unaltered is why this thread may seem to some as sounding petulant.

    As a second order result of some of our other more pressing first order problems, this year's team did not play well. The team failed to execute. Our passing this year was generally terrible, but that does not mean the Heels lack a tradition of excellent possession soccer. Ask anyone from Stanford's 2009 squad. However, we did not fail to pass because we were playing "kickball". We did not run a high pressure offense this year either. It was not that we were booming the ball to our rocket-quick forwards who were then getting shut down. Our strikers have rarely (if ever) had to struggle harder for even half decent chances.

    It will take us another year to work our way out of the challenges we have created. During that year UNC's program will continue to be fun soccer and the envy of most other programs in the country. By 2013, many other teams will have improved. Some of the teams that now look so promising may have faded. If UNC can retain its recruiting edge in a more challenging economic environment, we may well challenge for a National Championship in 2013, playing whatever style works for us. I will be surprised if direct play does not remain a part of that equation. The women's college game has some years yet before the level of play is so strong that good teams will need to outwit their opponents. For the foreseeable future they can win by just outworking them. Like many others, I look forward to a day when the whole sport is more polished and sophisticated, but just wishing won't make it so.
     
  11. footie4life

    footie4life Member

    May 24, 2011
    NYC
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    We are in agreement then. The only difference is, you believe it is a few years away and I believe that we are witnessing it's birth throughout this year's College Cup run.
     
  12. paltrysum

    paltrysum Member

    May 19, 2010
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I haven't watched either team so very much looking forward to seeing them on ESPN this Friday and Sunday.

    Of the east coast teams I've seen recently (Boston College, Maryland, Penn State, among others) the biggest problem I've seen is that either they don't care about turnovers or their recruiting was based on athleticism instead of technical ability. Stanford and the few other teams that value possession really minimize turning the ball over.

    I'm hoping to see Wake and Duke teams that exhibit better ability to retain possession and minimize turnovers.

    Maybe, but that sounds a bit like Neanderthal saying that "I will be surprised if clubbing people over the head does not remain part of the equation. It's too soon to say that Homo Sapiens style of play, using those opposable thumbs and all, will be the future."
     
  13. Lorrie Fair

    Lorrie Fair Member

    Jul 31, 2010
    Paltry hasnt watched any team. He's just a bandwagon Stanford fan that thinks theyre the only team that can possess the ball.

    He also comes on here bashing UNC and Anson.
     
  14. Newfor2010

    Newfor2010 Member

    Jan 29, 2010
    Club:
    Asker FK
    So like the many others that are excited the moment UNC is out of the running for a national title as their team's chances of winning its first or second increases dramatically.

    We all know how important UNC (whether they are up or down) is to women's college dialogue and interest and UNC will be watched equally close next year - it doesn't change.
     
  15. GoCourage

    GoCourage Member

    May 27, 2001
    Durham, NC
    I thought the same thing when I read the post in the NCAA tournament thread about the person not actually seeing Wake or Duke play, but claiming to know all about UNC's style of play.

    The suggestion from cpthomas that people in this forum should read a book just made me wonder how that was going to happen if they couldn't even watch the games they were supposedly commenting on...
    You should probably change that to "UNC will be criticized equally emphatically next year"... we shouldn't actually expect people to watch them, to make comments about their style of play.
     
  16. paltrysum

    paltrysum Member

    May 19, 2010
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Not true at all. But I can see why you'd think that. You aren't objective enough to see the truth in my comments.

    I think a team that blends possession with athleticism is the ideal. When I say I'm excited to see what Wake and Duke have to offer, I am sincere. I think Stanford sways a little too hard to the possession side and not enough to athleticism and it might well be their downfall. Let's face it, greater athleticism is largely what beat them vs. both UNC and Notre Dame in the past two championships.

    I have great admiration for the dominance UNC has established in women's soccer but I'm curious to see over the following years if it was more that Dorrance just had a virtual monopoly on the best players or if he can adjust to greater parity and show that he is more than just a guy who can only win when he holds all the cards.
     
  17. Newfor2010

    Newfor2010 Member

    Jan 29, 2010
    Club:
    Asker FK
    Nope - I meant watch to see if they win or lose because if they play the "ugly" style and win then . . .
     
  18. IMALONDONER

    IMALONDONER New Member

    Feb 18, 2005
    Wow. Real classy, Lorrie! Somehow I always imagined you above such cheap crap.
     
  19. Focker

    Focker Member

    Oct 29, 2010
    That's not the Lorrie Fair that played at UNC. It's just a fan of Lorrie Fair the player.

    :D
     
  20. RAMbunctious

    RAMbunctious Member

    Jul 19, 2011
    The poster under Lorrie Fair handle said he/she was just a fan of hers that it wasnt actually her. I seriously doubt that lorrie fair has time to waste posting on here.. hehe

    Though some former players might read this thread.

     
  21. UNC4EVER

    UNC4EVER Member

    Sep 27, 2007
    I wanted to think about this a little bit, before replying. After consideration, there is something a bit patronizing about UNC's historical style of play. It assumes that other teams Are weaker; that a full-court, high-pressure defense will force errors against less skilled players; that other teams cannot match our speed of play or our general fitness. After thinking about that for a while, and thinking about the women's college game, I still think that is a pretty robust model for getting to the final four most years. Maybe not this year, with the powerhouse that was the ACC, but generally, the depth of program in the women's game is not so great that good teams cannot outhustle other squads to the CC. I Do think that once you get to the CC level, that all goes out the window and the competition is such that variables like technical excellence, coaching vision, player solidarity and chemistry, a bit of luck, all become critical to the final result.


    Yeah, that makes me wince too. While there is an element of arrogance in the style UNC has traditionally played, I remain shocked at how dismissive many posters are about the UNC game. It makes me wonder how many of our detractors have played? IMO, receiving a driven ball at a dead run, collecting it, and racing 20~30 yards to the box with All The Fury Of Hell nipping at your (Tar)heels, then delivering a composed finish to beat a good keeper, is about the hardest move in the game and a Huge challenge for even the best striker. (Maybe that is why so many men's teams have given up trying to do it?) I have never understood why folks would choose to smirk at that. It ain't so easy, and its not just about being athletic, you need to be a very composed and skilled player to make that work. If you can do that, chances are you have a pretty well developed skill set for other tasks as well. I just thought I'd mention that as an aside to those who are so dismissive of direct play, whether from Carolina or anyone else.
     
  22. footie4life

    footie4life Member

    May 24, 2011
    NYC
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    Hmmmm.......that is an odd statement. Those very things are actually tried and accomplished every week in Men's leagues all over the world. Allow me to link to a few of the masters of the modern game. There are many other examples of course.

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRwjpUPJmA8"]Wayne Rooney Top 20 Premier League Goals Part 1 - YouTube[/ame]

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGshR6vgVEY"]Robin van Persie The Master - YouTube[/ame]

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vS6OKvVa94c"]Lionel Messi: Career Highlights - YouTube[/ame]
     
  23. OnSecondThought

    OnSecondThought New Member

    Nov 23, 2011
    Club:
    --other--

    When you say so many men's teams have given up trying to do it, what men's teams do you mean in particular? Even if that was the case (which footie so clearly demonstrated it isn't) are you saying that a collegiate women's team is more technically adept than a professional men's team?

    Besides, I do not recall seeing many goals from the Tar Heels this season that fall under your description above. There is a big difference between hell-bent kick and chase soccer and the direct style of attack you have mentioned.
     
  24. UNC4EVER

    UNC4EVER Member

    Sep 27, 2007
    Well, I see I have clearly skated onto ice so Thin I have completely fallen through... oops, my bad. I was being glib. :eek:

    My ill-considered statement was an attempt to draw a contrast between the "horrible non-possession" style of the Heels and their immitators, and the more stylish and thoughtful "beautiful game" played by the best of the men's teams (and of course by Stanford, though they have yet to win a Championship with it-- the year ain't over for them of course :)).

    Obviously, direct attack is a part of the men's game, and IMO should be part of the women's game as well. In retrospect, the point I had hoped to make was that it aint so easy, and that there is a big difference between "kick and chase" and direct attack. The Heels have never been a kick and chase team, and that was my point. OnSecondThought's observation about our offense this season is fair enough. Just one more problem among many. But then, we aren't in GA, are we?
     
  25. giggs4ever1

    giggs4ever1 New Member

    May 31, 2011
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    It is foolish for anyone to suggest that technical posession based soccer is not the way the modern game is being played around the globe.

    Countries and teams who have not adapted to the change on either side of the gender divide have and will pay the price at any level including youth soccer.

    On the mens side the leaders are clearly the Spaniards and the bar has been set very high in this regard. Even the stubborn English have finally recognized this (took em 45 years since they last won the World Cup :)) and recently brought in foreign coaches to lead the charge.

    It is without a doubt the womens game will parallel the mens game in this regard and what happens on the mens side generally will carry over to the womens game with a time lag which is what we are seeing now in terms of technical posession based play. The last womens World Cup gave us a glimpse of this.

    On the womens college front, the more progressive coaches and teams have figured this out and made the conscious decision to implement this style of play and equally importantly recruit players that can play this style. From my observations UNC has not made the move yet and at this time may be caught somewhere in between. Like the old England they may not be fully convinced at this time that posession soccer is required to win games at the collegiate level and secondly they dont have enough players with the technical ability like a Stanford to play this style. From what i have seen there may only be 3-4 players on the current UNC roster that are technical enough and have the soccer intelligence to execute this type of play at speed and under limited time and space (ie-under pressure).

    Unfortunately, a full move to technical soccer at the womens college level will not happen for some years or ever as teams can still win games on athleticism (just not the big games). Non top 20 teams who realistically do not have a chance to win it all will not make the move as they can still win more than they lose by playing kick and chase and these teams make up the majoprity of NCAA division 1 soccer and in the end everyone keeps their jobs.

    As a soccer purist it is refreshing for me to see all 4 teams in this years version of the College Cup are ones that put a high emphasis on ball movement and maintaining posession. Winning is still the best way to convince outdated minds and may be our only salvation in moving the game forward in a positive direction which is in the best interests of US womens soccer.
     

Share This Page