In addition to rooting for SMU and Stanford, the Heels need to be pulling for Alabama (36) to do some damage in the SEC tournament and then would love to see James Madison (57) come through and win their tournament as well. Then they'd have two top 50 wins (maybe 3 if SMU beats Louisville and it pushes them into the Top 50 as well. They are currently 59.).
Looking forward to the game tonight and crossing my fingers that we can win over State. I'll be amazed if Lauren Malsom and Riley Kennedy will be back from Morocco, but hope anyway that they could have nailed a flight back to the US on very short notice. If they are not at the field tonight, I would think that it might be a pretty even game.
My view of why this season's ups and downs is frustrating us fans is simply that the loss of seven players going pro from last year's team was too much for this team to re-group. Four were highly experienced seniors or graduate students, while the remaining 3 played well beyond expectations. This season we have pretty much been playing with 2 seniors, 1 junior, 4 sophomores, and 4 frosh. It's ups and downs.....different than an experienced team. Hopefully, next year the Heels will keep most of the experienced players and add a very strong new class. But in the mean time, let's hope that the Heels can do well in the NCAAs (assuming we're in.)
Is it a foul to impede the keeper on a corner kick--or any kick, I suppose? I just an NC State corner kick, and some sort of foul that I did not notice was called--and the announcer said it was for impeding the keeper. That surprised me because keepers ALWAYS seem to be impeded on corner kicks, with opposing players crowding in front of them and making it nearly impossible for them to get to the ball, in many cases. I've always thought this box crowding was unfair to the keeper. Refs do call a lot of fouls on the attacking team on corner kicks---and most of the time it's never stipulated by the announcers what the foul is, so maybe it is impeding!
One of the worst impeding is when the keeper is bundled across the line into the goal. ^ years ago I was in France watching the U20 US team vs Japan. THe Us keeper was bundled into the goal mouth with the ball and the whistle immediately whistled that it was not goal. UNC saw this in 2024 in the championship with 16 seconds to go and a one goal lead and UCLA with a corner kick. Two UCLA players bundled UNC's keeper across the line while another UCLA headed the ball into the across the line to even up the score. The ref simply called it a goal and would not relent.
Yes, I remember that corner kick by UCLA--and agree that goal should have been disallowed. Something has always seemed wrong to me about corner kicks--with a phalanx of players all crowded around the poor keeper, who is somehow supposed to fight her way through bodies to snatch or bat balls away.
L'orange, I of course agree with you. It certainly is an issue that is hard for referees to see what is really happening when 18 or so players re all crowded in front of the goal. However, in a bundling case, it would seem to me that the linesman has a great view of who is IN the goal before the ball is played in front of the goal and should raise the flag.. The 2024 example is classic. Two UCLA players started shouldering the keeper into the goal just as the ball was struck, leaving the header a clean space. It clearly was a planned move, and it worked.
The biggest part of this play that is not talked about is the hand checking. What you can do against field players you simply can't do against goal keepers. They're supposed to have freedom of movement of their hands, never mind be able to move around the box unobstructed. UCLA players basically pinning and checking Allen's arms at the start of the play, which is a foul by itself, nevermind all the other physical contact which could be debatable. Honestly, tho ... they could have turned around and punched Allen in the stomach and it still wouldn't have been called based on how far away and utterly uninterested the officials were in drawing attention to themselves at the end of a big game. That's modern officiating culture across all sports, not just soccer. They're more interested in protecting the entertainment value of the game and their own reputations amongst their peers as opposed to their theoretical actual jobs of protecting the integrity of the game and the safety of the players. It's not their fault and it's hard to blame them unless they really embrace it like this particular official did ... it's just the reality of their current work environment if they want to succeed.
Well, the Heels are the 8th (and last) of ACC teams in the big show. The committee rated the other 7 ACC teams ahead of the Heels (which included Clemson and Wake Forest.) The un-ranked Heels will go back to Knoxville to again take on the third ranked Tennessee this fall. I suspect that this will be a close game, and I hope that the Heels will score and win this time. If we win this time with Tennessee (and take the #3 rank), the good news is that the Heels will get to play the next game at Chapel Hill against Texas Tech. However, it will be unlikely that the Heels will be back at Chapel Hill, unless some one knocks off #1 Vanderbilt and we make it to the elite 8. I certainly hope that Olivia is recovered and others are healthy.... Go Heels!
Indeed, you are correct regarding Texas Christian. However, it is Texas Tech who would be our only realistic possibility for a home game on 11/20. (...and indeed only a miracle could make even more games at home. If Memphis takes down TCU and if UNC beats both Tennessee and Texas Tech...then we have 2 home games. Then if Vanderbilt trips up with Clemson or Iowa, the Heels could have a third home game!! ....totally dreaming.)
No, you cannot get a home game on 11/20 unless TCU, Texas Tech and Memphis all lose their first round game. The 2nd and 3rd round games (11/20 and 11/23) are at the same site which barring the most ridiculous upset is a seeded team. You are unseeded meaning you are at the bottom of the list to host. To host the quarterfinal, every seeded team needs to lose in the bottom bracket. In summary, UNC will be on the road every round from here on out.
OK..my bad not remembering the 2nd and 3rd games on the same field. And yes, as I said above, I am dreaming. I have understood that if a un-ranked team beats a ranked team, the underdog gets the higher ranked number going forward. In this case UNC would be #3 going forward if they beat Tennessee. and if they beat the next two teams (presumably Texas Tech and TCU)) and Vanderbilt looses to either Clemson or Iowa, then they would be at home with the #3 ticket. No?
They don’t inherit the seed. They would have to play another unseeded team in the quarterfinal to even have a chance to host.
I seem to recall a year where a team expected to host a regional lost their first round game. Instead of the next highest seeded team hosting the regional, it went instead to an unseeded team. I can't remember what the circumstances were or who the teams were, but I seem to recall it had something to do with the team it should have gone to was unable to host for other reasons. That being said, it seems like a long shot for a variety of reasons for UNC ... ... and we have to prove we can beat UT first.
That is definitely possible if a team is not capable of hosting. Georgetown for example had to get lights or they were going to be prevented from hosting due to complaints from Santa Clara a few years ago. There are definite things you must have to host, and I don’t think any seed this year would be in that predicament.
Lights became a requirement to host starting last year. The only other reason I've heard over the years is when a team didn't officially put in to host with the NCAA. I believe this was the case with Kansas last year because when the request came in the leadership didn't believe they would be a NCAA tournament team.
Does anyone understand the procedure that leads us to be ranked lower than Clemson? To make the college cup, we would need to improve our away record from 3-5 to 7-5....
Regarding playing a seeded team and winning, although I would prefer to have the team that does it inherit the "seed," I have watched this closely over the years and it does not happen. I have a dim reccollection that a good number of years ago, Florida State did not bid to host because there was a football game and no reasonable housing for an incoming opponent. I may have the wrong team, but that's what I remember.
The team's instagram announced "signings" for next year. They include Strawn as well as O'Neill and Trayer from the u/17 uswnt but not Antonucci who was a 2026 commit.
I've followed the commits all along. Antonucci commited this morning (as shown on X from UNC) If all of the UNC "commits" sign up, the 2026 class will be quite strong. However, In today's era of big money, so many of the good players at universities, will be pickled off by various pro teams. Only the big money Universities can compete. Private schools are not restrained and Universities such as Duke, Standford, Notre Dame seem to be keeping their soccer players as well as their football and basketball teams. (Big example is Duke which put out $15 million for a two year quarterback.) One can also also see on line how much universities are paying basketball recruits with the top dozens being at least in the several millions range. One would think that UNC could keep its players, but in last year's team 3 starters left because they had 4 years behind them. and 3 others with years left to play went to the pros anyway. Money talks... and to this point, UNC does not seem to have the seriously big bucks for women's soccer for 4 years.
In between all the signing posts, the team posted a few frames about their trip to Knoxville, and it was worth noting that Aven Alvarez is traveling with the team, so that's a good sign. Nothing about anybody else that I could see.
Did you see Olivia Thomas?.... To move forward I think that that the Heels need to have all of their players available.