http://www.gobucsgo.com/sports/wsoccer/roster/gregg.html Charge! has noted his preference for Missy. And since hackers have destroyed most of the discussion, the link gives some background on her . Paul's view is he wants her, and is concerned, some other team gets her. My view is the return of Kelly Smith turns the Charge into a 50 goal team, and the forward matter gets addressed via international allocation. My view is Missy Gregg will be available at pick 15 for the Charge. Her statistics from Dayton are very good, and at D2, overwhelming. WUSA is a far higher level of play than D2 and A10, so the question becomes, how good is she really . Unless you seen her play, that judgement is too premature. Is she better than Latham or Schott or Wallis, forwards probably available whent he charge select at 6 and 7.
I think a clarification is in order... Under NO circumstances should the Charge draft Gregg 4th or 6th, since there are more important needs that have to be addressed (Withers and Solo, hopefully). But when we got the extra draft pick with the Mandy trade to SJ, that gave us a lot of wiggle room, and that makes the drafting of Gregg at #7 imperative, IMO. Only at #7, though. In doing so, you thus have someone who may not have the speed of an Enos who can break down defenses like no one I've seen, but you've got the all-time women's collegiate goal scoring leader, regardless of division number, a super-sub if ever there was one. She was the Pichon of division II, and she's got the size that her opposition, even when she was at Dayton, simply could not handle. Ideally, you draft her at #7, or you re-enact the russian roulette scene from The Deer Hunter and hope everybody else takes a pass on her not once, but *twice*. A bird in the hand, people. If we don't take her, someone else will. And that team will be better off for it than they were before draft day. Adam and I differ, I think, on where the women's game is going. My view is you need a couple of tall, athletic players, as the Courage and Freedom have recognized, but which the Charge have not. Not yet, anyway, but February would be a good place to start. Paul
Missy Greg I have a hard time trying to justify what I'm hearing. Missy Gregg has size and can score goals. I accept that! She also did it in weak Div. 1 conference and the proceded to follow that up at a weaker Div.2 conference. She has size and is no doubt intimidating to individuals in these conferences. Does a defender in a weak conference want to put their body on the line, No! Why did she go to these weak schools if she is what you say? In the WUSA she will intimidate nobody. And she will be taken down like she has probably never seen. Who will be intimidated ? Not the WUSA players. The Question is why these schools. Not for the edu. Communications? Hey, really c'mon who are we talking about here? Is there even any O.D.P. exp. I don't know this person, never seen her play, but if I were scouting for WUSA I would be looking for someone who has done well against formidable opponents. So there is no comparison to the other players mentioned above. I do wish her well. It's a huge step up to WUSA from where she is.
ODP?? Rising to the occasion isn't an exclusive characteristic of division 1-a schools; it's universal; you don't think those players who faced her didn't go all out to try and stop her from scoring? That's a slap upside the head to the teams Christian Brothers faced. Maybe you didn't mean for the last sentence to come out the way it did.... Paul
Re: Re: Missy Gregg One more thing, FWIW. Gregg was the W-2 League player of the year last year, I believe, with the Memphis franchise. Paul
Whooooopee! I mean it just the way it sounds. How bout a reality check. If she could play at a higher level maybe she should have. Dah! I not saying she can't play, she has a lot of work ahead of her. If she is all you say that is great and no need to take offense, She is someone you like, I wish you both the best. If players want to strive to be better players they welcome the best competition. If students want to be the best academically they strive to attend the best, most competitive institution of higher learning. In this way they prepare themselves for the future, and attain tough goals. If she is this good she was undoutably offered offered Scholarships to some of the top colleges in the country. It seems she went the other way. It's simple, if you want to be the best, play against the best. If not, well you know where this is going. I'll spare you the honesty. As far as that award, that and $.50 WILL GET YOU A BUS TICKET TO THE COMBINE. GOOD LUCK, SEASONS GREETINGS TO ALL. E.C
I'm in general agreement with east_coaster, you need to examine the level of competition and then project to what the level of play is in wusa. Paul is infatuated by her numbers, and he's never seen her play. Is Gregg, Sinclair?? No way... Is she Welsh, I severely doubt it. Is she Schott, who knows, but Schott has played in a very good college league. As to size being the critical element. I disagree, it's skill, then speed, then size.
D2 hype = Minna Mustonen = flop D2 hype = Missy Gregg Will Missy Greegg be a flop? She is at best a 3rd-rounder.
I really hope Missy Gregg can show well at the combine. Anyway, as for Schott, you know I'm really high on her needless to say. I just want to let you know Adam, that Schott has played w/ the U.S. National Team in the Algarve Cup. Started 4 or 5, I believe she scored against Norway. She's played multiple times on the u-21's, including the Nordic, I believe she had at least 1 goal and 3 assists. I believe injuries this year has something to do with not participating on the U.S. level or attending camps. I don't really know where she will fit w/ all the great players this year. I do feel however she should go high in the first round. After recovering from her injury this year, I think Penn was her first game, she played very limited time 10 -15 min. Also against U.S.C. and U.C.L.A. It seems to me she scored 18 points in the last 6 or 7 games, 7 goals. And the only one in the Pac-10 to score against Stanford, one of 4 goals scored against them in the entire season. She can score, she has great skills, speed,and I believe any team who does not get her will wish they had. Another player I would like to comment on Welsh. I saw her and Schott play together on the National Team. I've only seen welsh in three games. In the Final 4 they seemed to push her up and had her running onto the ball. This took away from her showing her distribution skills and holding skills. It's hard to evaluate her by what was seen there. I feel she is the stronger of the top 2 players everyone is mentioning here. Understanding Withers is right there with these 2. But as far as a Striker I'll stay W/ Schott. I believe these numbers are accurate. Go Charge! Good to see ya back Cachundo. E.C.
Nice to see you back too EC, although it seems BS farted all your previous posts. I agree with Adam about the physical attributes. First and foremost to me is skill. Then speed. And then size. If you look at the men's game, Ronaldo didn't win two European POY awards because he's a giant. And previous winner Zidane was neither big nor fast. In the highest levels of soccer, skills reign supreme. With all this talk about Gregg & Schott, someone on another thread thinks Clemson's Deliah Arrington's worth a 1st-round pick. Maybe she's good. But because of where UNC plays, the coaching establishment thinks highly of the ACC. My money's still on Schott and/or Wallis to crack the 1st round, not some ACC hype.
Cachundo we seem to agree. I don't know Arrington, but A.C.C. has'nt shown that well. I wish the Pac-10 had been spread out in the bracket for the playoff. What if the Pac-10 had competed against some of the other regions instead kicking the crap out of each other in the riaval matchups we saw. I believe that some coaches seem to portray (sp?) certain players as Gods' gift to soccer from a certain 3 universities. When they are coached by outstanding coaches as a team for 4 years they tend to rely on familiarity of the team. I feel the players who are allowed to create opportunities, be it out of need or coaching style will be better suited to WUSA. I'll give more credit to the player who does well in creating opportunities,scoring, takeaways, saves, while playing on an average team than on playing for the top 3. It's great to be able to have support and play well, its quite another to have to create it. WUSA should have parity,to an extent. The players who can rise above and are familiar w/ creating and making things happen will be the most valuble asset in the draft. The founders will bring the fans, the creaters will bring the wins. It was well received by E.C. to see Stanford do what they did this year. It shows we are getting closer to parity in the college ranks and students can feel free to go to a university of their choice and have a chance to be on the National Team and play for the WUSA. I love the fact that Clive won, it's well deserved. It would have also been interesting to see the outcome if the rivals not be paired in the beginning rounds.Stanford-Cal, U.S.C.- U.C.L.A., W.S.U.- A.S.U. That reeks of someone not wanting to have a fair outcome.
Just watching the college cup, teams like Portland and Santa Clara, exhibited a more technical game than UNC and Penn State. When teams are more evenly matched, it's the technical ability which separates sides. If you have better athletes, you can overwhelm many teams, just by physical presence. But there are more good female players, and that tactic doesn't work as well any more. Kirkorian's style is to be technical, and look for players exhibiting those skills. So players like withers or hawkins or wallis or misaki fit thet style the Charge play. I believe the Charge do need a forward to complement Pichon. The question becomes, is this player some one like Latham or Schott or some one else.
I'm getting slightly off-topic, but EC is right about how the system seems to favor the anointed ones. Cal's been put into Stanford's bracket the last three years, although Santa Clara's just a few miles down the road. Yes it's supposed to be a regional bracket, but when every year you see Stanford-Cal, UCLA-USC, ASU-Wazoo knock each other out in the early stages of the NCAAs, you gotta wonder. Sending Portland to BYU may have made sense because Utah & Idaho State were right there. But Portland were seeded 8th, what good does that do? Good thing Portland clobbered BYU. Served them right. Watching Stanford-UNC, I was underwhelmed by UNC's technical skills. They play boot-ball to outrun their defenders. They're more of a track team than a soccer team. Two or three forwards come in every 15 minutes for fresh legs. No wonder they play as if there's no tomorrow. How can they play tactically & creatively when they know they're on the clock? They just run run run until the opponent gets tired. Maybe they can do that to the rest of the ACC. They got a rude surprise when they found out that the Stanford defenders were actually faster than they were. Hell, even St. Mary's forwards were having their way with UNC defenders even though they ended up on the short side of a 3-0 score. UNC & the ACC are overrated, plain & simple. All you gotta do is look at the landscape for recent UNC grads playing pro. But someone will make the mistake of drafting UNC's seniors. They always do. It's a very good thing for college soccer that a Santa Clara and a Portland won the last two years. Skill, creativity, & tactical organization, more often than not, will triumph over speed. And the soccer teams, not a track team, won.
You can extend this criticism to the national team as well. The primary reason for success, in the past, had largely to do with having better athletes. The ball would be in the USA offensive end so much, defenders rarely had to defend, and when they did it was a test of speed. Need we name Lorrie Fair as the poster child for this mentality. But the game has reached a tactical threshold, where this mentality is no longer sufficient. Wagner is the primary step. Now, heinrichs needs to rid her self of what she looks for in defenders. The female game is still in childhood, with most of the rest of the world still yet to be conceived.
Skills are really what differentiates a great soccer player from a good one. A Prinz, Pichon, or a Kelly Smith can turn the game all by themselves. The good thing about the proliferation of these talented international attackers is that they shatter the myth that American defenders are good. If in league play, the vaunted American defenders can't match up well versus a Kelly Smith or a Katia, I doubt very much that they can do it in the international arena. Remember, the old ladies barely sneaked by China in a PK shoot-out in '99. And we've been riding that euphoria ever since. In soccer, sometimes it's better to be lucky than good. Personally, I'd rather have a Team USA that's technically and tactically superior. But that would spell the end of the fan favorites, would it not? Four years is an eternity in international soccer. Need I remind everyone about France in Japorea. The exposure of American defenders to these creative and explosive international attackers will force them to become better, technically and tactically. But that will take time. Evolution does not happen overnight, even in soccer. Back to Missy Gregg. As a forward in the pros, you have to do more than score. Take one from Ape as to why Fotop & Wombat have not been on her selections lately. It's been said she wants them to be more technical and be able to hold better on top. Shows you there's a different, if not more stringent, requirement in the international game.
The ability to hold up top is what makes Latham such a force. In the American game, both men and women, the ability to shield and protect the ball is sorely lacking. Watch a little frail Sissi, and she can do it, it's all about positioning, and being one with the ball. For too many players, the ball is an alient object. And that's the area our defenders need to improve, all to often in 1999, it was whack the ball forward or out of touch. I prefer not to pay money to watch it all too often. This philosophical change will be slow in coming. It's one of the reasons the UNC mafia is disliked, the aesthetic ugliness of their game. As the female game matures, this approach will need to die. Perhaps Jerry Smith replacing Heinrichs will hasten this day.
Agreed! Schott was a starter for Jerry before her injury. At the Nordic as well as other venues. She was playing this year w/a strained ACL and I believe I saw a support of some sort on her rt. Achilles. I'm not making excuses here, no need, I believe she had 18 points and 7 goals in her last 7 games. But her game had to be more direct w/ these injuries. Very difficult to stop and go and change direction. Any way those numbers speak for themselves. Cachundo, did you see the Santa Clara - Cal. game 2yrs. ago. In this game Santa Clara received 6 yellows and 1 red, the brunt of which came from taking down Schott. This was Jerry's way of stopping her. And I agree. A healthy Schott is a diff. player than you see this year. I believe this year she tried to heal and stay out of harms way to be able to help the team in the playoffs.
The pecking order for forwards in the draft, in my view, is: 1) Welsh, I assume NY wants her 2) Latham, being Canadian causes a bit of draft difficulty, based on her foreign status 3) Schott or Wallis, since I haven't seen either, judging between the two is something I can't do. I believe the Charge will use a foreign allocation to get a forward to pair with Pichon. However, I still believe a forward will be drafted, to act as a 3rd forward. And I think this forward would need to have some holding skills. I leave it up to posters who've seen these forwards play, inform us about who has better target skills. Latham, I've seen, and she passes my test, but again the issue is use of the allocation, and possibly the draft being used more wisely in conjunction with the allocation.
I really don't remember. Maybe this was after Satan Clara upset & demolished Stanford @ Spartan Stadium. SCU forgot to read the memo that after losing all those seniors the year before, they were supposed to suck that year. LOL.
I think you got it right. Suppose BOS-PHL-ATL draft Orlandos-Withers-Hawkins. How about using # 6 on Latham, instead of some mystery Chinese[speculation]? I think Latham will be a better fit than either Gulbrandsen or Zhang, or anyone else, for that 4th international. Very few forwards play big, & there may be an opportunity to acquire someone who does.
Jerry Smith Needless to say Jerry Smith is the premier coach out there presently. What a freek'in record. All the teams he coaches respond positively. Can't wait to see him w/ the full W.N.T., it's gotta happen! Hey! And Stanford this year Wow! Did that team show some stability thru adversity, that coach was a motivator, he just had to leave to motivate them. My hat is off to that team, they left alot of history for generations to follow. Thanks for all the posts Adam and Cachundo. It's great to hear all these opinions. Hey the rest of you out there join in and write we would like to hear your opinions. Don't be afraid of the feed back you might get a diff. take on what interests you. Happy Holidays. I don't have an affiliation w/ this site but visit the soccer store and help support the site. E.C. All sites exist off there sponsors.
Since this is the off season, a lot of IN SEASON regular posters aren't here, but will return once training camp rolls around. I agree with cachundo, Latham brings a skill not present on the Charge. I see her as a perfect partner to Pichon. A Smith-Latham-Pichon attacking trio would be quite dangerous. Withers-Latham-Solo wouldn't be a bad draft at all. Get a 3rd central defender inthe 2nd round, and I can't see any other areas needing much improvement.
And surely the Canadian Latham can speak French to keep Pichon happy. LOL. Latham as target will make the attack even more dangerous. Geez, picking up Latham won't be bad at all.
But she may not be around at 6, since Atlanta will probably snatch her up at 5. So then she drops to 7... ;-) Paul