SIGH..... I get really tired of UNC bashers not knowing what they are talking about. It's as if one jumps on the band wagon and repeats a lie often enough, then it starts to be viewed as the accepted truth. This is called "group think" where mutual reinforcement is seen as reality. The FACT of the matter is that UNC plays possession with the best college teams out there. Sure, EVERY team has better and worse seasons as injuries, personnel, and perhaps luck play a role in how well they play. UNC has been down recently (in relative terms, that is, as most other teams would love to have their recent success.) And I would grant that they are not playing a pretty a soccer as they have in some former times. But let's not let a season or three change the overall view. I challenge the UNC bashers to actually do a scientific study of possession. That is, to observe over a season or so, markers like percentage of total time in possession of the ball, or corner kicks, or percentage of completed passes, (or even percentage of completed passes that advanced the ball.) What you will find is that most games wane and wax, but an overall pattern will show up. And I challenge UNC bashers to explain what it was they were looking at the 2009 college cup in terms of two consecutive games at the highest level where UNC out possessed Notre Dame and Stanford. In the finals, UNC statistically dominated a great (25-0-0) Stanford team (especially in the first half.) Did Dorrance just get lucky and the players (contrary to his reviled direct coaching style) play superior possession games? Or perhaps, just maybe, could you allow yourself to believe that they were actually coached to do so? [Please note that I do not intend to disparage Stanford. They are a superbly coached and highly skilled team that absolutely deserves their 3-year #1 ranking. They may simply have had a bad day in College Station in 2009 and in Cary in 2010, but that does not change my point.] Soccer is a complex game. The debate about direct play versus possession style is ultimately bogus as both tactics are used to advantage and both are necessary to highly successful teams. (Look at the three highlight reels posted above to support this fact.) I just get so tired of the ignorant drone of the bashers that UNC plays only one style.
Soccerhunter - agreed. The only comment that I would throw out is IMO, some of the "UNC bashers" are UNC people... It's not like this is Big 10 football getting annually pounded by the (then) PAC 10 or SEC and there is this wide talent and style of play gap. The difference is "bashing" a program when it is winning is usually a result of opposition envy, frustration at always losing to them, etc... while I would suggest that much of what is being written and commented on is "critiquing" of the current style when viewed against the top ACC competition (and the direction they appear to be headed) and that little voice in your head giving you a pause for cause and concern.
REALLY? I find these comments very interesting and perhaps even Curious. I can't imagine why we would continue this discussion here, as the UNC season is over. I suggest we move this to the NCAA thread (just cause more interested readers will see it there), and I will also be curious to see how the GA games are approached and resolved over the weekend. You seem to think that there will be a significant qualitative difference in the way these four teams play this weekend, as compared to play in prior years? Interesting. We shall see. Also, Stanford, the most traditionally possession oriented team of the four will need to face two ACC teams to win. If those ACC teams do not mix it up to try to push Stanford outside their comfort zone I will be surprised on many levels, not least of which is that, to some extent, that is what both UNC and ND did to beat them for the title in prior years... I have been lucky to watch ACC teams grow and evolve/devolve/re-evolve over the years, and since three of the four finalists are from our conference, I assume you must refer to them? If so, I think your comments are not historically accurate, nor inclined to really identify the causes for the likely trajectories of our various ACC teams over the next several years, but best wishes, time will tell. Maybe see you on the NCAA thread?
My post was placed on this thread as previous posters were talking about the UNC style of play this season. On this basis I see no real reason to move it to the NCAA thread but thanks for the suggestion. Do i believe there will be a difference in play this year prior to past years - absolutely, as all 4 teams play a technical ball posession style. Will any of the teams deviate from this style to gain a advantage over their opponenets based on perceived strengths and weaknesses - undoubtedly as this time of year is all about winning. Do i believe Stanford will win - not necesarily as they are playing some quality teams from the most dominant conference in the NCAA. Stanford has a one in four chance like everyone else.
Funny that UNC beat two of the three teams in in the final four and tied the other. WOW! You are right UNC plays terrible soccer and is on the way down.
For UNC fans it goes much deeper then a mere loss or two. It is the nagging realization that perhaps, just perhaps what we are collectively witnessing is the end of a dynasty, which while inevitable, is no less painful. This season produced some historic records of the forgettable variety. If my Tarheels do not win it all next season it will mark a sea change . The first ever back to back to back string of not bringing home the College Cup. Considering the top to bottom rebuilding that needs to happen on this team, I fear 3 in a row is already baked in.
Soccerhunter , while I usually agree with your postings and I respect your soccer accumen, having watched every home game and every other game within a 100 miles that my Tarheels played this season, I must disagree. There is a great deal of difference between padding your possesion stats because you double down on your opposition and win the ball for a few seconds ,then promptly give it away and mounting a concerted attack to goal. Ask your self how many times our players did a wonderful job of winning possession only to look like deers in the headlight with no inkling of what to do next. Early on in the season, I started counting the number of completed passes we were able to make in a row. We were very hard pressed to string more then 5 in a row most games. Thats not possession. Then I watched teams like FSU and Stanford make a 10 or 12 pass combination while moving the ball decidedly up the field and I am left wondering where did it all go wrong after 2009.
Don't worry they all know this but UNC just got lucky those days and AD must not have been coaching those games because he can't coach in this modern soccer age.
Footie, I do not disagree with your observation regarding this year and much of last. (And tried to say so in my post that you quote when I noted a few year departure from our usual mode of play.) This year I also saw what you note. My main point was that historically we have played possession very well, and there is no reason to believe that AD is purposefully moving in another direction. I see a recruiting slump and except for a handful of players we just do not have the talent all over the field that we are accustomed to. I see it getting better for the next several years, and we may have some stronger years soon, but, like you, I fear that we may be witnessing the end of the dynasty. It inevitably has to happen (eg Adolph Rupp, Ara Parsegian, John Wooden,. etc.) but it is sad to watch. The reason is that the rest of the women's college soccer world is catching up by virtue of a greater pool of more skilled players leading to parity. In the college game, the serious bottom line is recruiting no matter what the sport. Coaching magic may sparkle from time to time, but inevitably recruiting trumps all. The way Stanford, UCLA, Notre Dame and many of the ACC teams have been recruiting recently one can argue that UNC now has it's peers. While we can hope that AD will once again rise to the occasion and glory will again be enjoyed by us UNC fans, we must also be realists. This being said, as a UNC graduate and fan, I am ever optimistic that AD will indeed lead the Tarheels to at least one more multi-year thrust to the top.
Where did it all go wrong?.....I fear the cake is baked for three non-championship years in a row. AD has lost it..... Well, folks it's true that the dynasty may be over-- but here's the thing--John Wooden retired and his dynasty ended with him. But the difference at UNC is that AD hasn't retired, he's probably pissed off at not being in Ga., and he may be the most competitive coach alive. So UNC's 8-20 season, though tragic, could be motivational.
Wooden retired when he was still on top. It will be a sad footnote in an otherwise stellar coaching career if Anson does not get the same opportunity.
I LOVE this thread! There is never a dull moment! Beneath all the white noise, hyperbole and hysteria, there have been a group of very well informed and thoughtful posters who, over the last two seasons, have articulated a very specific list of issues causing the problems the Tarheels have faced over the last two years. It has all been said, examined, and very well articulated. There is no need to relitigate it. In short summary, it is not that UNC has been overtaken by a parity tsunami; nor that the possession-soccer rapture has arrived; nor that AD is suddenly senile. Rather, it is that Dorrance is misplaying (and to add, IMO, also mismanaging) a very specific cohort of players in very identifiable ways. We graduated 4 players this year. That will change the team to some degree, but not by a huge amount. Next year (assuming Daly returns as a RS junior) we will graduate 7 more. That will have a much greater impact on the dynamics of the team. I expect 2012 will be much like 2011; a good year, but flawed, and for the same very predicable reasons. By 2013 the team will be so altered that whatever the issues might be that AD has not been able to get his head around; it won't matter-- he will be coaching a substantially different team. In 2013, I think it will be fair to assess the fate and potential of the UNC dynasty. Who have we recruited? How are we playing? Has AD stuck with his (old) 3-4-3 and revitalized it, or has he changed to a 4 back and had time to work players into the new (French) system, or neither? The issue of some concern (to me) is that young people are, well, Young... and if UNC is a top 10~20 team three years running, will it hurt our recruiting? I am certainly concerned that it might. However, where should these young meat-eaters go? Portland is having problems, as is ND, as is UCLA. Stanford is about to graduate a cohort that did as much to define that program as did the 2006 class at UNC-- lets see how Stanford looks in 2013? Can we take a moment to recall Conn? Not to diss any of these programs! I only suggest that it is exceptionally hard to maintain a top-tier women's soccer program, and so far, only UNC has managed to do it. Were I to look forward for the next several years, I would be optimistic about Duke, FSU, and UNC to dominate the ACC, and the ACC to dominate the game. Of course, that is just spit-balling on my part. I would suggest that UNC has very specific issues, unique to a cohort of players. Time will (quickly) change that. Until we have more data, I think it is very premature to predict either the future of the women's college game or the viability of the UNC dynasty.
Agreed. Although I do see next season being very similar to this year, truth is, it's going to be a very different team. We don't know how the team will turn out, we don't know how other teams are going to turn out. No other program is going to dominate like UNC has all these years, that's for sure. Like Soccerhunter I believe that women's college soccer world is closing the gap due to the large number of solid recruits and the many great coaches leading. All this talk about the dynasty ending reminds me of Oregon cross country and track. Just an example of a successful program that had a quick decline and eventually got back to the top of their sport. Listed are the years they won team titles: Men's Cross Country: 1971, 1973, 1974, 1977, 2007, 2008 Men's Track & Field: 1962, 1964, 1965, 1970, 1984 Very successful in the 60's and 70's under Bill Bowerman and Bill Dellinger. Both coached the famous Steve Prefontaine. Bowerman and Phil Knight went on to co-found Nike. The program won once in the 80's and then began this period of time track guru's call the "dark days". Soon enough Alberto Salazar, Vin Lananna and Galen Rupp came to the rescue and rejuvenate the program back to an NCAA contender in cross, indoor and outdoor track for both the mens and womens teams. My point-if this dynasty were to "end", I wouldn't be surprised if those dark days didn't last very long. I really do believe the Tar Heels still have many more championships to win.