SLU Women's Soccer Thread

[Lord Elrond]

22 minutes ago, Pistol said:

Unfortunately, they did break the recent pattern they established. They won 6-0 on 10/12 vs. UMass and proceeded to win the next four games 5-0, 4-0, 3-0, and 2-0. We needed to see a 1-0 win last night.

But yeah, that 1-1 tie against Dayton on 9/24 was the last time they conceded a goal.

Part of me wanted SLU to be able to avenge that game, but La Salle (12-5-3) is the more favorable draw. SLU beat them 4-0 early in the conference season and 4-1 last season. Dayton (13-2-5) is really hard to score against and has a better record against a harder schedule- Dayton's RPI is 71 compared to La Salle at 117. Credit to La Salle for being so good in A10 play the rest of the way, though. Their recent form has been solid, too. Definitely the next toughest opponent after Dayton.

Dayton’s downfall was an inability to score. Three draws in league play sent them on the road to play LaSalle, and LaSalle got in the goal that Dayton, despite Dayton outshooting them 21-9, 12 shots on goal to only 2 for LaSalle, and a 6-3 advantage in corner kicks. LaSalle got the ball to bounce their way when it counted. Shows the danger in not being able to finish your shots, even though you get more opportunities. LaSalle has stepped up their game, Billikens must not look at the 4-0 result.

Incidentally, looking at the box score from last night’s game on the A10 website, looks like upon further review they took the goal away from Emily Groark and scored it an own goal on the Dukes.

 

[courtside]

39 minutes ago, Cowboy II said:

-to me it looks like crazy depth to score 5 and Gaebe isn't one of them

-keep it going Ladies

It is. That is a good point. SLU has 19 different goal scorers this season. And that doesn't include 2 players that were unable to play this sesason due to injury, and another who has missed the 2nd half of the season due to injury. (4 missing last night)

Having a 2nd 11 is essential in college soccer to win at higher and the highest levels. Coaches will talk for days about it. And that begins with elevating recruiting, and it extends with the player development program. 

When Gaebe began as a Freshman, I received messages from some seeking more from her. I received similar messages about Caroline Kelly. They both have gone on to great careers. 

SLU also scores in a variety of ways. Differrent players have different skill sets. Izzy Luebbert for example has 8 assists this sesson. Katie Houck scored one of the biggest goals of the year and she was one of SLU's best players in that game. She came close again last night but a strong point blank save denied her chance. Those 2 play outside back defensively and contribute to both set pieces and flank runs to initiate the attack. Abbie Miller and Anna Lawler are defensive midfielders who often score in two ways, set piece headers in the offensive third as well as top of the box trailing the play. Both scored big goals against top 25 teams in this way. And both along with SLU's center backs, provide good passes to put SLU's front 4 players in position to score.

Lyndsey Heckel and Sophia Stram are converted center backs who who are 2 more set piece targets who provide a lot of offense both finishing and otherwise. Their traffic on a corner allowed for Stram to win the rebound and set up a goal. 

SLU also generates a lot of offense through both its central midfield and wings. Groark, Simon, Larson, Kelly, Sawyer. 

Playing the best combination of players, in their most helpful positions, in various formations, with good game plans, and in game adjustments have also helped maximize success. The style of play and matchuos matter too.

Every field player can and should be able to score, create goals, and help generate offense. 

 

 

[Taj79]

From the Sam the Eagle perspective, that was an entertaining game.  The ladies dominated which really took any and all pressure off.  Sawyer has a great motor, there didn't seem to be a Duke backliner that could stay with her.  Question to the soccer gurus:  what happens with yellow cards?  Does your tally reset after the game or is it cumulative in any way?  Sawyer got one really late when the game was essentially over and Bill McDermott took great issue with her getting one that wasn't really needed.  

The control and passing were outstanding from my limited perspective.  

[Lord Elrond]

1 hour ago, Taj79 said:

From the Sam the Eagle perspective, that was an entertaining game.  The ladies dominated which really took any and all pressure off.  Sawyer has a great motor, there didn't seem to be a Duke backliner that could stay with her.  Question to the soccer gurus:  what happens with yellow cards?  Does your tally reset after the game or is it cumulative in any way?  Sawyer got one really late when the game was essentially over and Bill McDermott took great issue with her getting one that wasn't really needed.  

The control and passing were outstanding from my limited perspective.  

Yellow cards accumulate over the course of the season.  From the NCAA:

 Players or coaches who have less than five (5) yellow cards entering postseason will not be subject to suspension for caution accumulation until their eighth (8) yellow card. Players or coaches who have received five (5) or more yellow cards during the regular season will be suspended for caution accumulation after receiving their eighth (8) yellow card (regular and postseason combined). Players and coaches who are suspended for reaching the eight (8) yellow card threshold are subject to further suspension for accumulation for each two (2) yellow cards received thereafter (i.e., totals of 10, 12, etc.)

Hannah Sawyer has only 3 after last night, so she has a way to go, I would have been more worried about her picking up a second that same night, which means she’s ineligible for the next game right there. Still, no sense in giving away yellow cards if you can avoid it. Her 3 lead the team, so everyone has a ways to go to worry about total yellow card accumulation for the season. 

[Pistol]

3 hours ago, Lord Elrond said:

Incidentally, looking at the box score from last night’s game on the A10 website, looks like upon further review they took the goal away from Emily Groark and scored it an own goal on the Dukes.

Yeah, weird. It was clearly an own goal from the start, so I'm not sure why they didn't call it as such in the first place.

[Lord Elrond]

Just now, Pistol said:

Yeah, weird. It was clearly an own goal from the start, so I'm not sure why they didn't call it as such in the first place.

They announced it at the game as a goal by Emily Groark, assisted by Emily Gaebe, and never announced a correction during the game. Did they ever correct it during the telecast that you noticed? I guess it’s all academic now, but I would find it odd it got corrected after the game.

[Lord Elrond]

Quote

 

All Conference rewards are out

Defensive Player of the year: Lyndsey Heckel

Goalkeeper of the year: Emily Puricelli

Offensive Player of the year: Emily Gaebe

First team All A-10:

Lyndsey Heckel

Emily Puricelli

Emily Gaebe

Abbie Miller

Caroline Kelly

Second team All A-10:

Sophia Stram

Katie Houck

Hannah Larson

All-Rookie Team:

Alyssa Bockius

A-10 All Academic Team:

Hannah Larson

Katie Houck

 

 

[courtside]

On 11/1/2023 at 11:17 PM, courtside said:

SLU 5 Duquesne 0

The game went mostly as expected. 

Two 4-2-3-1 formations.

The Dukes sat 9 behind the ball at times. SLU used the width of the field, worked the sidelines, East/West service from the wings in the attacking third of the field. Larson and Kelly made multiple nice runs early, running at defenders, both in space and as a target. Gaebe received balls in space and she won several corners.

A physical Duquesne team, committed several own third fouls for free kicks. Colder weather inspires more direct simple plays, traffic in front, and any way possible to get the ball over the goal line. 

………………..

Scoring:

21st minute. Win 50/50 ball at midfield, Houck to Kelly wide, diagonal run, lay off to Gaebe right edge of the box, centers just past Groark for the in stride deflection off of the defender and over the line. 1-0.

38th minute. Gary pressures the defense to force the turnover to Sawyer, cuts in and shot deflected over the bar for a corner. Set piece corner, Sawyer missed the play for Stram near post, with Gary providing keeper traffic. But the keeper was caught playing far post and she didn’t get there in time and Sawyer’s corner went in off of the keeper. 2-0.

39th minute. Good combination play and pressure from Simon and Gary, cross sent in and Simon forced a turnover and she immediately took a shot low far post right edge of the 18. 3-0

47 Gaebe wins another corner. Stram wins the ball in front after Luebbert’s corner, lays it back wide to Luebbert who chips it far post to Kelly for the volley goal. 4-0.

75th minute. Good combination play from J Preusser and Gary. Jess feeds nice through ball in space to Sawyer who runs onto it, and she cuts inside, 10 yard left footed shot, deflects in off of keeper at close range. 5-0.

…………...

All healthy available field players played at least 20 minutes for SLU. (4 unavailable)

…………….

Same SLU lineup for 7th straight game. 9th game since Gaebe began starting games.

Time of SLU’s 1st goal in those games:

5th minute, 9th minute, 16th minute, 24th minute, 10th minute, 1st minute, 22nd minute, 1st minute, 21st minute.

…………….

SLU moved to 4th nationally in shots per game behind BYU, Texas, UCLA.

SLU moved into a tie for 2nd nationally with 63 goals on the season with Texas, behind BYU. Nebraska is 4th.

SLU moved into a tie for 3rd nationally with Nebraska for total season assists at 61. 

SLU moved to 6th nationally in shutout percentage. 

…………….

RPI after Wednesdays games:

BYU 1 (Big 12 Final)

Brown 5 (Ivy Semifinals)

SLU 13

Nebraska 19 (Big 10 Semifinals)

Xavier 22 (Big East Semifinals)

Utah State 52 (Mountain West Final)

Dayton 71 (Season Complete)

…………….

SLU is projected by most as a #3 or #4 NCAA Regional Seed with a win on Sunday. (Top 12 or Top 16 overall national seed)

…………….

 

 

 

RPI after Thursday’s games:

BYU 1 (Only loss is to Utah State)

Brown 5 (Perfect record in the Ivy)

SLU 14 (Shut out once all season)

Xavier 20 (5th nationally in G.A.A)

Nebraska 22 (4th nationally in goals)

Utah State 52 (Have won 11 of 12)

[courtside]

On 10/30/2023 at 9:49 PM, courtside said:

Creighton announced they have parted ways with Head Coach Ross Paule after 9 seasons.

Paule was a stand out player on a few of the elite mid 1990’s Creighton Men’s Soccer teams. And, he had a 9 year successful MLS career. They never were able to get it going there. 2020 was one of their better seasons where he earned Big East Coach of the Year. Preseason pick this year for 3rd in the Big East, the SLU opponent, finished 10th. 

I only post coaching changes that have a direct connection with SLU. So there will be several that might not get a mention. 

……………..

Marisa Kresge is out at Illinois State after just 2 seasons. Very quick. She struggled in those 2 seasons, and she cycled through several assistants, but two years is pretty short. ISU has an interim AD after the previous one was dismissed in a road trip expense scandal. 

Prior to that the former Wisconsin Badger player recruited 3 of the top St. Louis area recruits to Wisconsin in multiple recent years. (Wisconsin has a high level program.) as well as a few SLU targets from elsewhere.

…………..

Sarah Barnes is out after 6 seasons challenging seasons at Miami FL. One of SLU’s national priority recruiting targets this cycle was an almost Miami FL (family connection there) or SLU commit and she ended up elsewhere at neither school. 

……………..

The other referenced coaching changes and their connections: SLU played Creighton. Several SLU commits turned down Kansas for SLU, and Purdue landed a national priority SLU target last recruiting cycle. 

…………….

Boston College also made a change, and there’s a good story there, but it doesn’t affect SLU directly via playing or recruiting. 

…………….

[Gremio14]

19 hours ago, Lord Elrond said:

All Conference rewards are out

Defensive Player of the year: Lyndsey Heckel

Goalkeeper of the year: Emily Puricelli

Offensive Player of the year: Emily Gaebe

First team All A-10:

Lyndsey Heckel

Emily Puricelli

Emily Gaebe

Abbie Miller

Caroline Kelly

Second team All A-10:

Sophia Stram

Katie Houck

Hannah Larson

All-Rookie Team:

Alyssa Bockius

A-10 All Academic Team:

Hannah Larson

Katie Houck

 

 

Rhetorical….but how is Larson not first team??  She is,  in my opinion, our most technical player.  

[courtside]

24 minutes ago, Gremio14 said:

Rhetorical….but how is Larson not first team??  She is,  in my opinion, our most technical player.  

You are correct about both. I would have had Larson 1st Team. She's been one of SLU's best few players this season.

I don't get too caught up in individual awards except as to how it can help SLU's recruiting or marketing for other reasons. Example: SLU can sell a center back recruit that SLU took a forward, converted her to center back, and she became an All American. Or other positions too. And compared to some other times, the overall list wasn't too bad. Tbat was the one that stood out to me too.

Part of the reason is everyone can't be chosen for everything. The league will want to spread it around a bit. Part of it is looking at obvious things like certain stats or box scores without watching players play. You have to watch the games and practice to understand players and teams.

Larson is a pacey, two way wing with strong technical ability. She moved to the middle vs BYU because SLU was challenged with the pace there. She would be very good there. But the team need is greater on the wing.

Early in the season her relentless effort led her to try to do a little too much and she needes to keep her feet a little more. She made that adjustment. She's a very unselfish player. She can run at defenders. She can finish. The team is very aware she is one of their best players. Her former youth club is very aware and aplreciative of her ability. Excellent in combination play and a good passer.

After a strong first year, Hannah had a very unfortunate knee injury the week of SLU's NCAA game a few years ago. It was a big loss in a 0-0 PK NCAA game. She sat out a long time.

And last year she picked up an ankle injury at La Salle which wasn't as severe but impacted her a bit.

So she sometimes gets lost in the shuffle with awards and such.

SLU prefers speed on the wings and two way defending and positioning. She also takes more corners and set pieces this year. 

Some of the things she does aren't going to be on a stat sheet as opposed to some analytics and other.

And she'll be back again next season which is great.

 

[Lord Elrond]

1 hour ago, courtside said:

You are correct about both. I would have had Larson 1st Team. She's been one of SLU's best few players this season.

I don't get too caught up in individual awards except as to how it can help SLU's recruiting or marketing for other reasons. Example: SLU can sell a center back recruit that SLU took a forward, converted her to center back, and she became an All American. Or other positions too. And compared to some other times, the overall list wasn't too bad. Tbat was the one that stood out to me too.

Part of the reason is everyone can't be chosen for everything. The league will want to spread it around a bit. Part of it is looking at obvious things like certain stats or box scores without watching players play. You have to watch the games and practice to understand players and teams.

Larson is a pacey, two way wing with strong technical ability. She moved to the middle vs BYU because SLU was challenged with the pace there. She would be very good there. But the team need is greater on the wing.

Early in the season her relentless effort led her to try to do a little too much and she needes to keep her feet a little more. She made that adjustment. She's a very unselfish player. She can run at defenders. She can finish. The team is very aware she is one of their best players. Her former youth club is very aware and aplreciative of her ability. Excellent in combination play and a good passer.

After a strong first year, Hannah had a very unfortunate knee injury the week of SLU's NCAA game a few years ago. It was a big loss in a 0-0 PK NCAA game. She sat out a long time.

And last year she picked up an ankle injury at La Salle which wasn't as severe but impacted her a bit.

So she sometimes gets lost in the shuffle with awards and such.

SLU prefers speed on the wings and two way defending and positioning. She also takes more corners and set pieces this year. 

Some of the things she does aren't going to be on a stat sheet as opposed to some analytics and other.

And she'll be back again next season which is great.

 

What’s also weird is that Hannah Larson, who is clearly a mid-fielder, was put in on the second team as a forward. Weird things happen in selecting these things. Good players from good teams sometimes get overlooked as they try to make sure that the entire roster of one team isn’t on the list. If it’s any consolation, good players on bad teams sometimes get overlooked as well. Example: George Washington was objectively awful this year, 4-11-3 overall, tied for last in the A10 at 1-8-1, 317th in RPI (out of 347 teams) and they are looking for a new coach. However, Aoi Kataoke on that team is a midfielder who tied with Anna Bagley from VCU for the lead in assists with 9. Anna Bagley was a first team pick as a mid-fielder (deservedly so). Aoi Kataoke got nothing, even though the next highest player with assists on that team had only 3 (think other teams wouldn’t have been keying on her?). But she played on a bad team.

P.S. - I forgot to mention she did all that with only 14 games played, 4 less than Anna Bagley and 6 less than Hannah Larson. With her 2 goals, she was involved in 11 of her team’s 25 total goals. Other teams had to be keying on her, yet she still produced. Not sure what she wants to do with a new coach coming, but if she wants to move on to another team and stay in the A10….

[courtside]

On 11/3/2023 at 1:01 PM, Lord Elrond said:

What’s also weird is that Hannah Larson, who is clearly a mid-fielder, was put in on the second team as a forward. Weird things happen in selecting these things. Good players from good teams sometimes get overlooked as they try to make sure that the entire roster of one team isn’t on the list. If it’s any consolation, good players on bad teams sometimes get overlooked as well. Example: George Washington was objectively awful this year, 4-11-3 overall, tied for last in the A10 at 1-8-1, 317th in RPI (out of 347 teams) and they are looking for a new coach. However, Aoi Kataoke on that team is a midfielder who tied with Anna Bagley from VCU for the lead in assists with 9. Anna Bagley was a first team pick as a mid-fielder (deservedly so). Aoi Kataoke got nothing, even though the next highest player with assists on that team had only 3 (think other teams wouldn’t have been keying on her?). But she played on a bad team.

P.S. - I forgot to mention she did all that with only 14 games played, 4 less than Anna Bagley and 6 less than Hannah Larson. With her 2 goals, she was involved in 11 of her team’s 25 total goals. Other teams had to be keying on her, yet she still produced. Not sure what she wants to do with a new coach coming, but if she wants to move on to another team and stay in the A10….

 

I think you mean Aoi Kataoka. She’s a good player, as is Bagley. 

The best advice I would give anyone is PGF, which is Practice, Games, and Film. Attend as many practices and games across the country of various teams as you can, and watch as much film as you can of various teams across the country. That’s essential for someone to have a more credible informed understanding of players and teams than simply reading box scores etc…That isn’t feasible for everyone, but it is necessary to do some of that to more effectively interpret and understand play vs just reading box scores. It doesn’t matter if that’s choosing A10 awards or for anyone else.

 

For example, because of the SLU game the other day, I was unable to be in Philly for the La Salle vs Dayton game. So I was unable to credibly comment on that game. I have since seen film on that game, so I have a little bit better understanding of what transpired in the game. And combine that with having seen both teams play in person and on film several times, that helps. If for example I hadn’t seen La Salle’s recent play, I wouldn’t credibly be able to comment on their recent form. That would also apply to their early season results. So, PGF is the best advice that I can give anyone to get a better understanding of teams and individual players. 

 

[Lord Elrond]

Yeah, the stupid autocorrect on my phone kept changing Aoi’s name. Smartphones are so smart they are stupid sometimes 

[Taj79]

Since i don't read the courtjester, I'll blindly bet you the king of artificial intelligence corrected you too.

[Lord Elrond]

35 minutes ago, Taj79 said:

Since i don't read the courtjester, I'll blindly bet you the king of artificial intelligence corrected you too.

The fact that I am also a hunt and peck typer doesn’t help me much either. Between that and autocorrect, it’s nothing short of a miracle that I produce any coherent posts in the first place.

[courtside]

On 11/3/2023 at 12:50 AM, courtside said:

RPI after Thursday’s games:

BYU 1 (Only loss is to Utah State)

Brown 5 (Perfect record in the Ivy)

SLU 14 (Shut out once all season)

Xavier 20 (5th nationally in G.A.A)

Nebraska 22 (4th nationally in goals)

Utah State 52 (Have won 11 of 12)

RPI after Saturday’s games.

BYU 2 (Big 12 Tourney complete)

Brown 9 (1st Ivy loss since 2018)

SLU 15 

Xavier 21 (Big East Tourney Finalist)

Nebraska 23 (B1G Tourney Complete)

Utah State 43 (MW Tourney Champs)

[courtside]

 

Exploring La Salle

 

La Salle is a physical team that excels in team defense in back, and relies upon timely goals (Walker, Gschrey,) The Explorers like to tinker. They play a 4-2-3-1, 4-5-1, 4-3-3, and a 4-1-3-2. SLU will likely be 4-2-3-1 (same group for 8th straight game)

 

Their base formation is a 4-2-3-1. They will use a 4-5-1 in special circumstances to play very defensive. They used this against SLU when they feel they need max defense, and at times late in other games with leads. They will go to a 4-1-3-2 for more offense at any time of a game. (less likely v SLU early). And they also play a 4-3-3 at times. I expect La Salle to mix up formations as a tactic. It would be a challenge for them to play it straight up for 90 minutes.

 

Within their multiple formations, La Salle likes to frequently move attacking players around into different positions up top, on the wings, and in the middle. Their back 5 of 6 is mostly set, as well as their keeper, Aguadro. (Castorina, Drumm, Gaston, Vricella, Garguilo.) Picco will occasionally come out for a different formation or for an added attacking player. 

 

Banashefski is set as their attacking center mid, but she will occasionally drop wide with a lead. Their other 3 attacking positions see more shifting and moving around. McCready, Gschrey, Hollenbach on the wings with Estrada. Walker up top and wing, and Butlion also up top. Walker is a size and pace forward who can get in space. Gschrey is their best attacking player. She moves around the front 4 positions and she has a knack for timely offense. Holllenbach is a wing bench spark. Those 3 will get up the most shots. And they will rotate sides with their wings within halves. 

 

La Salle will try to get their outside backs forward, to help generate their attack as they only play 1 Forward up top. And they use the width of the field, build up the wings and distribute. They will collapse the middle defensively, and their strength is the 2nd defender in a group team defense. They make final tackle and they play bigger than their size.

 

SLU will want to isolate defenders and spread them out. Make their back line play higher than they’d prefer. La Salle will want to stay compact, defend as a group with a back 6. If La Salle plays 8/9 behind the ball, SLU will have to be more direct, play diagonal balls over the top, make the defense move East West with pace and more direct. 

 

Defensively SLU will want to force transition, high pressure, and produce quick counters out of their own end. La Salle will concede possession and want to make SLU build from the back in a possession game. La Salle doesn’t have a lot of size besides Walker and Aguadro. Opportunity for SLU for aerial crosses inside the 18. And at times  bigger target forwards can hold defenders, turn and find back post runners in space against them. 

 

In the previous matchup, both teams played different lineups and personnel than what will happen Sunday. This change will be more advantageous for SLU. SLU has scored within the first 24 minutes since Gaebe has started (This will be the 10th game that she’s started). And SLU has averaged more than 4 goals per game (7 games) with their most recent lineup changes. 

. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Pistol]

2-0 SLU with about 12 minutes left in the first half. Kelly and Gaebe have the goals. All Bills so far.

[Pistol]

SLU is up to 11 fouls but La Salle has all 4 yellows. (SLU should have one.)

[Lord Elrond]

If my math is correct, SLU has now help opponents scoreless in the last 920 minutes and 31 seconds that they’ve played. 

[Pistol]

4 minutes ago, Lord Elrond said:

If my math is correct, SLU has now help opponents scoreless in the last 920 minutes and 31 seconds that they’ve played. 

Correct.

[Lord Elrond]

Also, I guess we should have expected all the yellow cards from LaSalle, they lead the A10 by far with 34. For comparison, the Billikens have only 16, middle of the pack in the A10.

[courtside]

23 hours ago, courtside said:

 

Exploring La Salle

 

La Salle is a physical team that excels in team defense in back, and relies upon timely goals (Walker, Gschrey,) The Explorers like to tinker. They play a 4-2-3-1, 4-5-1, 4-3-3, and a 4-1-3-2. SLU will likely be 4-2-3-1 (same group for 8th straight game)

 

Their base formation is a 4-2-3-1. They will use a 4-5-1 in special circumstances to play very defensive. They used this against SLU when they feel they need max defense, and at times late in other games with leads. They will go to a 4-1-3-2 for more offense at any time of a game. (less likely v SLU early). And they also play a 4-3-3 at times. I expect La Salle to mix up formations as a tactic. It would be a challenge for them to play it straight up for 90 minutes.

 

Within their multiple formations, La Salle likes to frequently move attacking players around into different positions up top, on the wings, and in the middle. Their back 5 of 6 is mostly set, as well as their keeper, Aguadro. (Castorina, Drumm, Gaston, Vricella, Garguilo.) Picco will occasionally come out for a different formation or for an added attacking player. 

 

Banashefski is set as their attacking center mid, but she will occasionally drop wide with a lead. Their other 3 attacking positions see more shifting and moving around. McCready, Gschrey, Hollenbach on the wings with Estrada. Walker up top and wing, and Butlion also up top. Walker is a size and pace forward who can get in space. Gschrey is their best attacking player. She moves around the front 4 positions and she has a knack for timely offense. Holllenbach is a wing bench spark. Those 3 will get up the most shots. And they will rotate sides with their wings within halves. 

 

La Salle will try to get their outside backs forward, to help generate their attack as they only play 1 Forward up top. And they use the width of the field, build up the wings and distribute. They will collapse the middle defensively, and their strength is the 2nd defender in a group team defense. They make final tackle and they play bigger than their size.

 

SLU will want to isolate defenders and spread them out. Make their back line play higher than they’d prefer. La Salle will want to stay compact, defend as a group with a back 6. If La Salle plays 8/9 behind the ball, SLU will have to be more direct, play diagonal balls over the top, make the defense move East West with pace and more direct. 

 

Defensively SLU will want to force transition, high pressure, and produce quick counters out of their own end. La Salle will concede possession and want to make SLU build from the back in a possession game. La Salle doesn’t have a lot of size besides Walker and Aguadro. Opportunity for SLU for aerial crosses inside the 18. And at times  bigger target forwards can hold defenders, turn and find back post runners in space against them. 

 

In the previous matchup, both teams played different lineups and personnel than what will happen Sunday. This change will be more advantageous for SLU. SLU has scored within the first 24 minutes since Gaebe has started (This will be the 10th game that she’s started). And SLU has averaged more than 4 goals per game (7 games) with their most recent lineup changes. 

. 

 

 

 

 

 

SLU 3 La Salle 0

La Salle Explored.

 

……………

4-2-3-1 for both. La Salle mostly stayed in this formation. What they changed was subbing in an extra attacker or two. (Hollenback/Estrada) And they pushed up their outside backs and Drumm in the 2nd to generate more offense.

………………

 

Heavy dose of Hannah Larson down the left wing early in the game and she drew a 3rd minute free kick, Houck to Heckel. La Salle chose to move Banashefski to that side from the middle. It didn’t matter. 

 

La Salle marked tight early but they were vulnerable to bigger target forwards who play with their back to the goal, turn and provide diagonal back post service. Too much cushion. And they don’t always pick up the runner. And that happened with SLU’s first two goals. And it almost led to a few more goals in the 2nd half. 

 

13th minute far left side throw in and Castorina picked up Larson, but no one picked up Gaebe. She takes the space and rips a shot off of the far post. Kelly followed it in as the back side runner to settle and finish the point blank rebound. 1-0. 

 

Gaebe had a few high level chances and SLU threatened pff of set pieces but La Salle had good help defense, the 2nd defender. Several times Larson drew fouls and didn’t get to play the advantage. SLU won just about every single goal kick and keeper punt. Near 100%. La Salle definitely wanted to play physical and to break up the rhythm of SLU. 

 

27th minute, SLU wins a goal kick to Lawler who used used her technical ability to hold and control the ball while moving forward from 2 defenders. She calmly lined a pass to Kelly as a back to the goal target at the top of the 18. Kelly turned and she fed Gaebe who once again was not marked tight enough. Gschrey this time. She steps inside the 18 and rips a laser under the cross bar. The size of SLU, being strong on the ball gave La Salle’s outside backs and center backs some trouble as expected. 2-0.

 

In the run of play La Salle’s defenders played a high line and presses SLU’s forwards. Slightly more depth on diagonal balls would have been a counter to that to get behind. Where La Salle struggled was dead ball defensing in the final 3rd. 

 

Closest thing La Salle came to a scoring chance was Walker as a target and in space once getting behind the back line but it didn’t amount to much. 

………………………

2nd half.

………………………

57th minute. Larson continued putting pressure on the Explorer back line with wide runs and diagonal runs. Wins a free kick. Takes a good corner. Then she weaves through 3 defenders, draws 2 more and centers inside the 5, and Kelly buries it in front of the goal 3-0. 

 

1 minute later, Houck throw in to Kelly back to Houck who makes a strong run through 3 defenders to the end line cross and Larson was taken down while splitting two defenders making a run for the ball. PK missed by Miller Still 3-0. Nice save Aguadro to her left. 

 

1 minute later, Lawler wins the goal kick. (She and Miller won a ton of midfield balls all game. Right back in to Groark who played Kelly in space right side. She uses her size, strong in the ball. Low far post shot was full extension tipped just wide by Aguadro. Still 3-0. 

 

Drumm is good moving forward as a center back and has some pace, but she had all kinds of trouble with SLU’s size inside the 18.

 

1 minute later, Larson and Groark combo play and Groark sends Sawyer in to the top of the 18. She cut in to her left and Aguadro just got enough of it to push it wide. Still 3-0.

 

This was a few to several minute stretch where SLU missed an opportunity to extend to 5-0 type of score. 

 

La Salle had a few chances as they pushed their outside backs (Vricella and Castarina) forward. but the few shots were pretty routine straight on for Puricelli. Vricella to and Hollenbach. Walker also made a central dribble run and shot with het pace and strength. 

 

67th minute. Gaebe as a target shields Drumm and she finds Sawyer in space left side 8 yards out, 1v1 but Aguadro came out to cut the angle and made another big save. Still 3-0. 

 

Long free kick for La Salle and Stram accidentally headed it in space for Gschrey who hit a near post shot saved by Puricelli. 

 

Give and go from Jess P and Kelly back to Jess and she would like that one back. She waited just a second too long to bury the shot low past Aguadro and Gaston came out of nowhere with the goal saving tackle. Still 3-0. 

 

McCready to Gschrey left side, off of a SLU clear on a long ball. Gschrey cut inside the 18 on Schreiber, but she shot it well over the goal. 

 

Sawyer down the left wing after strong work from Bockius. Centers along the 5 yard box just beyond Gaebe and Larson.

 

Gschrey counter, she took the space and laid it off right side deflected cross back to her and a nice save from Puricelli. Gschrey, Walker and Vricella provided much of the La Salle offense. 

 

SLU wins another midfield 50/50 ball to Gaebe who sent Larson in on the right side of the box but her 12 yard shot was well high and wide. 

 

 83rd minute Gaebe wins another corner. Sawyer’s end swinger almost went in under rhe cross bar. Aguadro was just able to get 2 hands on it as she was getting flattened by Gaebe. Ball one hops to Lawler back post header to Kelly who volleyed it over the line for a goal. But flag was up for a SLU foul. Still 3-0. 

 

Gaebe in on the right side as La Salle tried to knock her down to no avail. Finally a 3rd defender clear out of the 18. La Salle flattened a lot of players but 1 didn’t go down once. Gaebe was like a bowling ball getting an 8/10 split on diagonal runs. 

 

86th minute. Miller with a nice middle of the field over the top diagonal ball to Gaebe in behind Drumm, and Emily overpowers her, but her low far post shot went just beyond the post. Emily would like that one back. Still 3-0. Aguadro did just enough. 

 

87th minute. Walker takes the space and sends it wide to Gschrey back into the moddle for McCready and she steps into one from 18, save Puricelli. 

 

Immediately after that, Gaebe beats 2 defenders at midfield and tried to send Groark in alone but her pas was a touch too square and Groark had to track it down and center back to Gaebe at the 5 yard line but Castorina did just enough and gave up herself physically to prevent the goal. Still 3-0.

 

88th minute. Groark wins a ball to Gaebe right flank, she curves a far post cross to to Gary who has to run it down. Jordan would like that back from 7 yards. She had plenty of time to settle it back to her right foot to shoot at a bigger wider goal. But she took the near post left footed shot as Aguadro ran out at her and she got a piece of it for a corner. Still 3-0.

 

So that’s roughly nine high level chances for SLU to tack on a few more. La Salle created 3 or 4 chances. And they pushed their outside backs and Drumm forward a lot. They left Gaston in back. And they combined that with Gschrey and Walker in the middle and up top.

 

Physical game. Good composure from SLU when getting fouled. Many of SLU’s fouls are often in the final 3rd trying to score. And many of La Salle’s fouls were in their own 3rd and half preventing goals. That’s common in SLU games. 

………………

6th straight A10 Conference Tourney Title for SLU. (5 of last 6 A10 Regular Season Titles)

………………

[courtside]

RPI after Sunday’s Games:

BYU 2

Brown 8

SLU 15

Xavier 19

Nebraska 23

Utah State 44

………………

SLU is in the 3, 4, 5 seed range. Worst but common projection I’ve seen is a 5. I think a 4 is fair. This will get SLU a home game and then a wait and see results after that. Difficult to predict 1st round opponents as some similar seeds will get a plus 100 low/mid major regional opponent, and others will get a bubble Power 5 type of team. Geography matters but not in every instance. 

Matchups and geography matter more than seed numbers after 1 and 2 seeds. Style of play etc….

Some non seeded regional teams may include Milwaukee, Valparaiso, Morehead State, Ohio. But there are other closer in geography teams to all of those schools. Some of the final seed spots may get taken by bubble Power 5 teams. (Indiana, Michigan, etc…)

Texas, Georgia, Iowa, were all upset conference tourney winners. So this pushes some other schools like SLU back a little bit. Almost SLU opponent Iowa, needed a win to get a dance invite. And just to make sure they did, they defeated Michigan State, Penn State, Wisconsin in a row. (sheesh). 

It will be interesting to see Ivy seeds as there are many strong RPI Ivy teams. (Brown and Harvard have the more SLU friendly type of style of play)

Last season as a #2 seed, SLU did not get SIUE or Missouri State (neither made it this year) who lost a combined 10-0 to Arkansas and Northwestern and, who were both worse seeds than SLU. And Mississippi St. was a 7 seed but they were somehow given a home game vs New Mexico St. (79 RPI and travel) So even though the NCAA likes to regionalize the first two rounds, it’s a guessing game. After that geography is less of a factor. 

Memphis is in a similar seed range as SLU round 1, so that match up wouldn’t happen. But the Tigers are not ruled out in round 2 as a 4/5 or 3/6 game. They returned most of their team and they had a strong season.

Preference would be to try not to play repeat/rematch games vs 2023 regular season opponents as much as possible. Play some new teams. 

………………