Revs news, Oct. 17

For the lockeroom wall:

Jeff Bradley's latest MLS Insider: Fourth Time Is The Charm

Funny, a lot of times when I see the word "opportunistic" used in sports journalism, it seems nearly synonymous with the word "lucky". Somehow it's always your opponent who seems "opportunistic", while your team seems to be "skillfull", "disciplined", or "focused". Seems to me I remember hearing this kind of faint praise before...

Well, we'll just have to see if the local boys can steal a couple of "opportunistic" goals and stumble their way to a victory.

 

is that the same thing as pragmatic serendipity?

 

More for the lockeroom wall from the Beau Dure at USA Today:

Galaxy should win MLS Cup, but will they?

As he quotes from Dan Loney (apparently a blowhard from CyberSoccer):

 

I would categorize Wolde Harris' goal as "opportunistic."

Was there an element of luck?

Perhaps, especailly if you consider - a perfectly floated ball by Kamler equidistant between the last defender and the keeper, followed by Harris's hustle to get between the defender and keeper, followed by a harris' deft touch far enough away from the keeper and defender so that neither could recover - to be lucky.

Yes, it was Busch's ball all the way and there was lack of communication, but how did that situation arise?

I have heard it said that luck is 90% hard work and I believe it.

I read Bradley's description of the Revolution as "opportunistic" as a compliment not as a put down.

 

Leave it to Looney to claim he could say it in one word, and yet he took 67,543 to say it.

Maybe they can beat Columbus in the Open Cup.

Tom

 

Having played with Brian Dunseth for a year and a half, Harris probably remembered the times Dunseth had similar indecisive moments. While I won't argue whether or not it was the goalie or the defender's fault, standing flat-footed with your arms extended isn't exactly textbook shielding. I'd expect better from my 10 year old.

As for the Revs being opportunistic, that would describe their offense the entire year, even though they led the league in scoring. The goals they scored all year weren't from elegant buildup or brilliant passing, but quick counters and capitalizing on defensive errors. Twellman converted a high percentage of his chances, and I'd say that almost 1/2 his goals were one-touch. The only difference is that we now maintain posession better, and the defense is strong enough for the "opportunistic" goals to hold up.

As for opportunistic meaning lucky, I'd say that Twellman and Ruiz are 2 of the most opportunistic players in the league, and no one's calling either of them lucky.

 

Within the context of the entire article, I don't read it that way at all. He's saying basically that the Revs get an "opportunistic" goal (often on a first touch...lucky?), then bunker. And this is part of the reason why he sees the Gals beating the Revs.

Every goal scored is obviously "opportunistic" in the strictest sense. In this context he implies "against the run of play", hence "lucky". If it were my team, I know that's how I'd read it.

 

198

 

Kamler's ball reached Wolde's head - that's not luck, that's a good pass. Wolde had no one with him, so he basically was trying to keep the ball alive, i.e., he passed it to himself. It wasn't lucky, but it was because of a defensive mistake.

Cbus scored off of a defensive mistake also. Net result in that game, a good goal by each team, and a goal caused by defensive miscues for each team.

 

Uh oh, maybe I shouldn't give you any copies of the ECG/PoCM until we're on the way to the airport after the game.

 

has this been posted? good article on Adin Brown that my friend Rob sent me

http://espn.go.com/soccer/s/2002/1016/1446898.html

 

I read Bradley's use of the word opportunistic as his saying that the Revs bury their first chance of the game, which allows them to set back and counterattack. As he says, "I'm not sure I've ever seen a more opportunistic team in my life. By my unofficial count, the Revs have scored a goal on their first chance in five of six playoff games."

They take their first chance (not a one-timed goal) and bury it. Because they are getting early goals, which doesn't always happen, even for good teams, the Revs are able to assume a defensive posture and put numbers behind the ball, which is more effective when they have a lead. Given that even good teams teams generally don't finish all their chances, means the Revs are on a hot streak--hitting their first chance in most of their games when, assuming a more normal distribution, they wouldn't (every team hits a % of their chances, not all of them). It's not like balls are bouncing off of knees, just the Revs have been getting early goals recently, which fits well with their defensive style of play. So assuming a normal distribution of finishing, the Revs have been fortunate to finish their first chance of the game a number of times in a row.

 

what he means is that he thinks the revs suck. HE MEANS HE THINKS THE REVS SUCK.

F*(& Him

Yo creo en Revolution

 

Busy day at work?

 

My thoughts exactly.

 

Not sure if this one got posted yet...

MLS Cup notebook: Twellman may play
By Marc Connolly [ESPN.com]

http://espn.go.com/soccer/s/2002/1016/1446991.html

(stuff on Twellman, Nicol, ticket sales)

 

Good article, Mr. Lewis, per usual.

I'd really like them to win it for Todd. At least he's leaving on a high. Hope he gets better soon.

Interesting about Kamler-Pierce infighting. I don't remember hearing about that.

 

Love that Microsoft Word "word count" function.

 

So here I've been really, really good about leaving this part of the board alone this week, and what do I get for my trouble?

Abuse. Abuse from MEANIES. Meanies like:

See, Tom, that's what makes it HYSTERICALLY FUNNY!

And you misspelled my name. What an appalling and ignorant mistake on your part.

By the way, I love the whole idea of "locker room material." If the Revolution are that strapped for motivation, how about putting up a sign reading "WIN AND YOU'LL GET MORE MONEY"?

 

Freudian slip?