2016-17 D1 Women's soccer thread!!!

Bernie you are way off on so many things it is silly sometime to debate with you. Did you even watch the game? Just like your assessment of the game against Pepperdine. $C's forwards were in the same class as the forwards for the Waves. Decent but nothing special. They recruit a slightly higher caliber player than they do and play direct. If you deny that I understand why you are voting for Trump.
Debate?
Who's debating?
I was just throwing my 2 cents in.
Climb down off that soap box before you hurt yourself.
 
Debate?
Who's debating?
I was just throwing my 2 cents in.
Climb down off that soap box before you hurt yourself.

No soap box Bernie. I will save that for you Trumpophiles. Just actually laughing out loud about how off base you are. Reminds me of your flame war with NoGoal where you were debating what a petite woman was.
 
$C's defensive players got exposed last night and if you don't realize that I understand. Blue collar work tends to numb the mind.
I think UCLA and USC are both really good teams.
Before last night I would have given SC a slight edge, but now I would call them dead even.
Both teams have the ability to go all the way.
 
Towards the end and To MAP's point the SC RB kept kicking the ball downfield to an elusive player named " Ms. Nobody There" and as a fan of soccer that was frustrating to watch. Those kicks were turnovers and wasted opportunities. Ucla just collected those kicks and attacked. Despite that the game could have just as easily gone either way. SC had plenty of looks and near misses. Neither team dominated the other.
 
To Bernie's point SC had 7 shots on goal compared to only 2 for UCLA and SC picked up 6 corner kicks compared to 4 for UCLA. I didn't see TOP but I saw the game and it was very even overall despite the score and the SOG and CK stats.
 
I think I liked it better when MAP went into hiding from embarrassment after UC LA lost to Colorado, but now he/she is making up for lost time.
 
Last time I read an excuse like that was back in the u-little days from good ol' Calikines.

The game tonight was a slugfest and hella fun to watch

Was USC having a great year?
Did they win big games at home?
Was this their year in the series for a home game?

If you can answer yes to all of the above questions, then you can understand my point.

The USC administration doesn't give a crap about women's soccer. They rent the stadium for 20K so that soccer will go away or be happy, instead of making plans for a real facility like a real soccer program with National Championship history would. It's not an excuse for the loss, UCLA was clearly the better team. But the home field advantage turned into a neutral field for both teams.
 
Was USC having a great year?
Did they win big games at home?
Was this their year in the series for a home game?

If you can answer yes to all of the above questions, then you can understand my point.

The USC administration doesn't give a crap about women's soccer. They rent the stadium for 20K so that soccer will go away or be happy, instead of making plans for a real facility like a real soccer program with National Championship history would. It's not an excuse for the loss, UCLA was clearly the better team. But the home field advantage turned into a neutral field for both teams.
I agree McAlister Field is the worst soccer field. What is the field demensions 100 x 55 yards?
 
To Bernie's point SC had 7 shots on goal compared to only 2 for UCLA and SC picked up 6 corner kicks compared to 4 for UCLA. I didn't see TOP but I saw the game and it was very even overall despite the score and the SOG and CK stats.

UCLA gets outshot almost every game because they POSSESS the ball and look for the extra pass in the final third instead of the shot from 25 yards out. Shots at half time were practically even. USC had 8-9 shots in the last 20 minutes mostly of the long range type. The players and people at the stadium know what happened. I understand how butt hurt their supporters are especially when they see the cavalry coming for UCLA that is going to make the games very uncompetitive in the next few years.
 
Was USC having a great year?
Did they win big games at home?
Was this their year in the series for a home game?

If you can answer yes to all of the above questions, then you can understand my point.

The USC administration doesn't give a crap about women's soccer. They rent the stadium for 20K so that soccer will go away or be happy, instead of making plans for a real facility like a real soccer program with National Championship history would. It's not an excuse for the loss, UCLA was clearly the better team. But the home field advantage turned into a neutral field for both teams.

Frustration...sense I?

Yet... I do understand.

Did u expect differently?

After all....we know what sport gets the spotlight.

Hint....(it ain't women's futbol)

Resolve - attend an academic institution that also has top tier athletics.

Suggestion - there's a good 1 just off Sunset/Veteran, they've got a mini stadium, bleachers, lights and all.;)
 
Back
Top