So now that conference play is here I thought its a good time start the PAC12 thread. First games went down last week. Obviously the one everyone is talking about is UCLA losing to Wash St despite a lopsided stat line. WSU is sneaky good and showed that to UCLA for the second straight year. Stanford and USC took care of business while Colorado continues there string of W's witha 6-0 shilacking of OSU. Arizona looked decent in their opening week loss to Stanford This week is gonna be interesting...UCLA gets to follow a L with a trip to Stanford minus Fleming and Mace. Stanford has its own issues with an early season MASH Unit. USC will play a struggling Cal before heading to the Farm Sunday for the National 1 v 2 match up Lots of great Soccer ahead. Colorado and Utah get the Arizonas while its the Washingtons v the Oregons Bring it on!
WSU employed smart/sound tactics versus the technically more capable UCLA and got the result two years in a row. I saw this same tactic by AZ versus Stanford last year and they almost got the result. Without a nice rebound it could've been a tie or possibly a Wildcat win. Will other teams like CU, AZ and Oregon attempt these same tactics versus USC, Stanford and UCLA?
Well, you didn't tell us what the tactic was.... I assume it was to sit back and look for counter-attacking opportunities. That is the usual underdog tactic and of course it can be effective, especially if a game goes on scoreless for a while and the superior team starting pushing forward even more....
We're kicking Stanfords behind even without our best players on the pitch. We don't wear the L for very long...
Very interesting and great day in Pac12 play Stanford with some sublime goals to beat UCLA 3-2 in a great match uSC scapes put a 1-0 OT won on a controversial no call at Cal. Washington State stays perfect on the year v Oregon, Colorado draws at ASU. Arizona takes care of Utah as well does Wash over OSU. I love this time of year. Bring on Sunday’s 1v2 match up
From watching the highlights, I thought it was a good no-call. The gk was waiting for the ball to drop to her hands. the attacker claimed the airspace and won. Now, had the gk jumped to snag the ball, and the attacker crashed into her, instant yellow card. This is why gks are instructed to jump for balls in the air. With protruding knee. It's not a non-contact sport. If she hasn't yet, invest in a mouthguard and flak vest for your player. The investment is peanuts compared to a broken rib or missing molars. Wishing for a clean, injury-free, and entertaining match on Sunday
Great match Sunday on the Farm. Not the result I was looking for but a really entertaining even sided game. Stanford made some great adjustments in the second half to put up some great chances. In the end it was about a great balll through to Sophia Smith who won’t miss that opp very often. Well done Stanford
The Pac should amend points standings to better reflect what was accomplished on the field of play. 4 points - win 3 points - OT win 2 points - draw 1 point - OT loss Towards the end of the title race, you'll see more teams go for it, instead of playing for the safe tie.
Some related data: Based on the last 11 years' results, on average 10.7% of games end in ties. I did a check for this year as of the end of week 5 of the season, since conference games (in a few conferences) begin in week 6. As of the end of week 5, 10.2% of this year's games ended in ties. That's a fairly small data sample, so I'd consider it in the range of the overall average. This may suggest that either teams don't play for safe ties during conference play any more than they do earlier in the season or, if they do, they aren't very successful at it.
Agreed. Colorado played at the Arizonas last weekend, cumulative score was 2-2, but since both games were 1-1, that was two points for the Buffs out of six. Winning and losing 2-0 would have generated three points. What cachundo suggests DOES better reflect what is accomplished on the field of play.
A couple of thoughts: 1. If one thinks in terms of 3 points being awarded for a game, it would be more logical to award 1.5 points to each team for a tie -- which would give teams more incentive to play for ties. 2. Several years ago, I took a look at valuing an OT win as poorer than a regular time win; and valuing an OT loss as better than a regular time loss, with a tie right in the middle, all as Cachundo suggests. I then tested the ratings that system produced to see if the ratings matched better with game results for all teams over the course of an entire season, than the current system of treating an OT wins/losses simply as regular wins/losses. They didn't. What that suggests to me is that such a change would not get the teams in any "better" ranking order, in that respect it probably would be a neutral change. Of course, there might be other policy reasons for it.
Was Cal expected to have a down year this year? Maybe rebuilding? Or was this season unexpected? Do they have injuries?
Graduated some key seniors including Boyd who was a stud in net. Currrently starting a walk-on who is doing an admirable job but things are sour in berkeley
I've wondered. Cal was picked fourth in the conference, ahead of Colorado. Boyd was awesome, but even weak teams seem to come up with pretty good goalkeepers and apparently they have one. If it's injuries, they must have really been decimated. Chemistry issues? I know Colorado had that not long ago, a decent team won its conference opener and never won another game, and I think Utah maybe did last year. Whatever it is, I hope they sort it all out AFTER October 18. Even though Cal lost at Oregon State, they did outplay the Beavers.
Slow weekend in the Pac. Single game weeks are rough on us fans but great for some recovery and healing for the home stretch. Some interesting games this week that could have an impact on at large bids and seeds. Colorado and Oregon face off in a match that could eventually sink the losers chances. Cal looks to play spoiler at Arizona. USC faces wazu at the Palouse andUCLA heads north v Washington. Any predictions or upsets?
If they take a page out WSU's book and play a stout D and Counter they can pull it off. They are gettable missing Mace and Fleming
If WSU plays like they did at Colorado, they are capable of beating USC. I know, CU won, but WSU was the better team. If they play like they did at Utah, the losing streak will reach three. UW thoroughly outplayed Utah, and for most of the game outplayed Colorado, lost them both. I think they can hold UCLA down well enough, but have to find a way to get a couple of goals out of all their possession and shots. I'm on the other side of Colorado, so the Buffs will have to win without me. Oh, the burdens we face.
I'm not sure what's with all the hate on BS regarding UCLA but I'm sick of it. All you UCLA haters were proven wrong and we did in fact get the W out of Seattle. We may not be at our best this particular season but we still bring it and give it our best. I guess you guys have to hope for another team to beat UCLA next week.
@Glove Stinks That's great that you watch up to 15 games per week. I don't watch 15 games per week but I'll try and watch as many as I can besides the Pac12 teams. I'm just very observant when people who are clearly attached to different clubs are collaborating together and posting strategies on how to beat UCLA or saying they should be beatable if X,Y,Z happens when you play them which definitely reads as UCLA being a huge target. Maybe that was the wrong observation or maybe there's a little truth to it. I shouldn't be criticized for being very protective of my school and wanting my school to succeed and make it far. I've been all of my home matches where the opposing soccer dads are nearby sometimes and they make cracks like UCLA is full of spoiled rich kids and these criticisms are coming from soccer dads from USC. I looked at them and gave them a very strange glance thinking "really?". I'm not saying those same people post on BS but I feel like UCLA isn't exactly well liked by other schools to an extreme sometimes where some of these criticisms are low level and don't make any sense. It's fine if there are specific coaching decisions or players or formations that are criticized, that's always fair game. I do feel a slight tension on this particular college soccer forum that seems to be against UCLA. At any rate, I'm here to stay in support of UCLA and won't be going away any time soon.
So it’s no secret here that I am aUSC Soccer dad. That fact came out last year by a UCLA Soccer dad who chucked my kid under the bus until he was red carded from this site. I’d be curious to get a description of theUSC dads you speak of as I know them all and none of them attend UCLA games but once a year. You should browse other links in the college section and you’ll find much of the same banter. When your team is one of the best in the country the chasers want to knock them off. When UCLA gets Mace and Fleming back they will be very hard to beat until then the competition is doing everything they can to take advantage of the opportunity. If that’s hate by your definition... BTW. This USC dad has several personal friendships with UCLA Players and families
So this latest piece from debarkasmann: Has you thinking people HATE UCLA: Also you think people are somehow connected enough to their college coaches to conspire to formulate a plan to beat UCLA: UCLA is a target BECAUSE they are soooo good and garner a lot or respect from all of us that we root for other teams to beat UCLA. If you follow the NFL, how many NON Chiefs fans were cheering them on to beat the perennial favorite Patriots? Embrace that UCLA routinely gathers top prospects and therefore can play, for the most part, a beautiful possession game against most, if not all foes. While most of us just hope that great defending and some key counter attacks will prevail against them... every once in a while.