SLU Women's Soccer Thread

[slufanskip]

Emily needs to time her runs better and stay on sides

[Lord Elrond]

Well, one mistake and we’re down 1-0 at half, can’t break through their defensive line much. Gaebe had a few chances, but couldn’t find net, also a couple of offsides which looked close. Outshot them 8-3, but only 1 on target.

[Lord Elrond]

Up to 19 shots and can’t find net, very frustrating 

[Lord Elrond]

Finally! Handball in the box, PK by Lyndsey Heckel in the 80th minute, 1-1 game

[Pistol]

2 minutes ago, Lord Elrond said:

Finally! Handball in the box, PK by Lyndsey Heckel in the 80th minute, 1-1 game

No question about the handball. Glad they got it right. Let's get 1 more...

[billikenfan05]

This team either plays like world beaters or they are on completely different pages. 

[Lord Elrond]

1-1 tie, 25 shots and all we scored was a PK

[almaman]

seemed text book example of a handball. thank god

[Bills By 40]

Finally made it to my first game of the season...very frustrating. I got to my seats in the 4th minute so I missed Loyola's goal but it stings to dominate the game the way we did and not find the net outside of a penalty. 

Side note - Emily Gaebe may be more dominant against her competition than any Billiken athlete I've ever seen.  

[billikenfan05]

16 minutes ago, Bills By 40 said:

Finally made it to my first game of the season...very frustrating. I got to my seats in the 4th minute so I missed Loyola's goal but it stings to dominate the game the way we did and not find the net outside of a penalty. 

Side note - Emily Gaebe may be more dominant against her competition than any Billiken athlete I've ever seen.  

I haven't seen someone just run past people like she does since Adnan Gabeljic.

[Bills By 40]

43 minutes ago, billikenfan05 said:

I haven't seen someone just run past people like she does since Adnan Gabeljic.

And it won't be just one defender, it could be the entire back line and I'm still confident she'll get where she's trying to go. And fight through a half dozen uncalled fouls on the way there. 

[willie]

2 hours ago, Bills By 40 said:

Finally made it to my first game of the season...very frustrating. I got to my seats in the 4th minute so I missed Loyola's goal but it stings to dominate the game the way we did and not find the net outside of a penalty. 

Side note - Emily Gaebe may be more dominant against her competition than any Billiken athlete I've ever seen.  

Agreed that  she certainly ran by people but it would have been nice if she put some of her shots in the goal. and as Skip said earlier start her runs onside, 

[Bills By 40]

6 minutes ago, willie said:

Agreed that  she certainly ran by people but it would have been nice if she put some of her shots in the goal. and as Skip said earlier start her runs onside, 

Sometimes those offside runs are as much or more the fault of the passer but I don't disagree with you. What kills me is how often she beats the entire defensive line and has no teammate within 20 yards of her to demand attention, be a passing option, clean up rebounds, etc. So often seems she's doing it entirely alone. 

[billikenfan05]

1 hour ago, willie said:

Agreed that  she certainly ran by people but it would have been nice if she put some of her shots in the goal. and as Skip said earlier start her runs onside, 

7 Goals in 11 games. Next best is Sawyer with 3 who has only played in 9 games due to injury. Billikens need to find a tertiary scoring threat. 

[slufanskip]

2 hours ago, billikenfan05 said:

7 Goals in 11 games. Next best is Sawyer with 3 who has only played in 9 games due to injury. Billikens need to find a tertiary scoring threat. 

And she also has 49 shots. There is absolutely no question her finishing has been off this year. She’s no doubt one of the best forwards in college soccer but she needs to be on target and finish better. 

[slufanskip]

3 hours ago, Bills By 40 said:

Sometimes those offside runs are as much or more the fault of the passer but I don't disagree with you. What kills me is how often she beats the entire defensive line and has no teammate within 20 yards of her to demand attention, be a passing option, clean up rebounds, etc. So often seems she's doing it entirely alone. 

Neither of the 2 I spoke about last night were the result of the passer. Both had her alone on goal, she just jumped the gun. It’s a hard thing to time it just perfectly. A little early, you’re offsides, a little late the pass doesn’t work. 

[courtside]

 

SLU  1 Loyola Chicago 1

 

Disappointing 1-1 result. Sloppy at times, disjointed at times, rushed often, lack of poise in the final 3rd, soft on the ball at times, a half step behind with 50/50 balls, and too individualized of an effort. Loyola didn’t make many mistakes and they defended their 18.. Early goal, defend most of the game with a couple of counter in space with pace each half chances for the Ramblers.

……………….. 

Loyola was as expected, a good. solid top 50 team. They played inspired ball after getting an early goal. But at times SLU made them look much better than their level. SLU continues to play up or down to its competition level, too often this season as opposed to one more consistently high level.And that’s something for the coaching staff.  

………………

SLU did open with the more aggressive 4-1-3-2 formation. But they surprisingly paired Larson up top with Gaebe SLU is better with Larson in the midfield, and Sawyer or a Freshman up top. Several times Sawyer was unable to run on to service as she had a longer run from the wing vs up top. Sawyer has been much more effective as a forward up top this season.  So, it was a good idea, but personnel positioning was off a bit.

 

SLU tried pairing Larson with Gaebe at Creighton. It was less effective because SLU has a greater need for Larson in the midfield. SLU later switched to a 4-2-3-1 late first half vs Loyola. Then they switched back to the 4-1-3-2 in the 2nd half with multiple different players paired up top.

……………..

Loyola played a 4-2-3-1 as expected. They played Harris up top for her pace instead of their 2 size target forwards. SLU struggled a few times with her pace, along with Hevey. Loyola had 4 high level scoring chances in the game. 2 in each half. 2 were Harris in space unmarked behind the defense. 1 was Cibulka stepping into a shot from 25 yards from distance. 1 was Hevey 1v1 wide with a center back. These were covered pregame. Besides those, Loyola progressively defended 7 to 9 behind the ball, and as a group, they blocked many shots and defended wide service and set pieces well. 

…………….

Loyola scored a nice transition goal, less than 3 minutes into the game. It was a 1 touch. 2 touch. 2 touch goal. It was an example of good positioning, sharp passing and execution, which is something SLU lacked much of the game.

 

SLU has struggled with transition defense this season. Harrison won a 50/50 ball at midfield and she played it wide to Roberts running up the flank at right back. Roberts played it up to Grisdale in the middle who passed it back up to Harrison who never stopped running. Harrison slotted a through ball in space in between SLU’s center backs, to Harris. Nice finish upper far post corner. Puricelli was caught in between. Harris as mentioned pregame is their pace forward/wing. Getting behind the defense is how she scores.

 

The key to the play was not defending the middle of the field well, and not having a center back either step up into the play to slow it down, or be able to sprint back and slide to knock the ball away. Need one or the other there.

…………….

SLU had several runs early in the game where the final pass was out of reach, off sides, or service was off target away from support. Loyola’s center back Abel went stride for stride multiple times with SLU’s attacking players edge of the box.

……………….

8th minute Luebbert found Simon behind the defense. Her cross to Gaebe sprinting 8 yards from goal was finished wide. High level chance to tie the game. Two nice passes. SLU’s pressure in the first 10 minutes was good. 

………………

Then SLU started playing far too many back passes. This allowed Loyola’s defense to set up, stay organized. and for them to play increased numbers behind the ball. clogging the middle. SLU is not a build from the back team. 

………………

16th minute. Another high level chance saw Simon play a target pass to Gaebe who turned nicely shielding a defender and she made a run to the 18. Larson was wide open for a slot pass alone inside the 18. Instead Gaebe kept it and she cut into the middle allowing 4 defenders to collapse on her, shot blocked and calmly popped up to the keeper. This happened about a half dozen times in the game. 

…………..

2 other times shortly after that, the play was to play it out wide when Gaebe had the ball center of the field in traffic. Sawyer made a long run past 3 defenders but she couldn’t get past a 4th. A chip wise for Larson or square ball to Smith were options there. Several diagonal runs to the middle or middle runs, went into the help defense where Loyola had numbers. This also happened at UMass too often. 

……………..

With its wings playing so deep. several times SLU’s attack would be 3 on 6. SLU seemed to rely too heavily on the 2 forwards and central attacking midfielder. That wasn’t going to be enough numbers against a deep back 6. Playing the wings so deep defeated the purpose of playing an extra forward. It’s like a coach hedging her bets with formation instead of going for it.

……………..

Far too often as was the case at UMass, SLU dribbled centrally or diagonally into the teeth of the back 6. too many 1 on 4’s, not using the width of the field to spread out the Loyola defense. 

………………

Nice build up and play in the 23rd minute for SLU. Luebbert up the line to Sawyer who played a nice diagonal ball over the top for Kim edge of the box. She cut inside the 18, best the first defender and she had her shot blocked but the 2nd defender. SLU had 2 attackers at the 6, but it was good defense and it was a little bit unlucky rebound. It was a good chance and it moved the Loyola defense back and side to side. SLU didn’t do enough of this in the game. Loyola blocked tons of shots in the game. It was a shot blocking clinic at times.

……………….

28th minute against the run of play, Loyola had a chance. Heckel (one of too many) back passes to Puricelli who was surprised by the back pass. Plenty of time and space, a target forward with a light press towards her. Easy play for Heckel to pass to 2 wide open players. Puricelli fanned on the back pass clear. It went wide to Houck, who lost her footing and her clear was intercepted by Cibulka. Mentioned pregame that she and a few others like to step into shots from distance, and she hit one from 25 in a crowd that banged off of the far post and out. Emily caught a break there. And it’s a play that didn’t need to happen 

……………..

31st minute, Gaebe grabbed a lose ball and she made a 60 yard run down the middle of the field, past the 2 center backs, all the way inside of 15 yards. But isntead of side stepping the keeper for a tap in, she took a right footed shot from the left side to chip it in over the sliding keeper. But she hit it just over the post/bar.2 point blank chances in the first half for Gaebe. She also had Larson all alone as 2 defenders were collapsing on Gaebe. A simple touch square pass would have been a wide open tap in goal for Larson down the middle from 10 yards.

…………….

33rd minute. Le with a nice give and go to Schreiber. Le wide service for Kim who made a nice near post run. But Kim fanned on the finish near post at the 6. Similar play to the goal she scored at UMass.

………………

Schreiber up the right flank centered to Schwartz all alone from 10. Her volley out of the air was over the bar. Howard gave some good later half minutes, mostly from her high soccer IQ. She knew when to hold up play. She was stronger on the ball, and she knew when to lay off passes wide to trailers etc….she was rewarded for it with increased 2nd half playing time. 

…………..

SLU had roughly half a dozen high level chances. 2 were almost sure goals. Loyola had 2 high level chances , 1 a goal, another off of the post. SLU dominated territorial 20-30 yards from goal. 

 

Later in the half with the frequent substitutions, SLU switched to a 4-2-3-1. And with it, SLU was able to get more players forward into the 18 in the attack with the pace a bit slower. 

…………………….

Half time adjustments: 

 

2nd half SLU paired Gaebe and Sawyer and moved Larson back to midfield, at least for a while before changing again. And this was more effective for SLU. SLU also did a much better job early in the 2nd half, using the width of the field. When Loyola defenders collapsed the middle, attackers played it wide to the corner for service.

……………

3 quality SLU chances in the first 12 minutes of the 2nd half. Simon up the middle to Gaebe who drew a 20 yard free kick. But Larson’s shot was over the goal on top of the netting. 

 

Larson long ball down the left side to Gaebe who won a corner. Larson’s back post corner headed by Le near post for an open Houck tap in, but Deardorff slid over at the last minute to get a leg on it and save a goal.

 

Howard ran at 3 defenders edge of the box. She played it wide to Sawyer who made a nice cross to Gaebe. But her volley from the 12 rolled wide

…………..

Another 60 yard run for Gaebe run through the defense to the 18. Sawyer made a diagonal run open wide but she was in an offsides position. After dribbling through 4 players, the 5th held her up and collectively her shot was blocked from 18. Loyola will take that every time. Howard was open wide on the other side trailing the play.

……………

62nd minute, Larson wide of the box to Sawyer. Nice run to the 18, cross was just knocked away last second in front of Schwartz for a corner. High level chance.

……………

66th minute Fox wide edge of the box to Gaebe whose low shot from 8 yards was saved right at Deardoff. Gaebe long ball from Stram in the corner,  a minute later, dribbled from wide of the box in to 8 yards near post save on a low left footed shot.

 

Several more chances from wide service knocked away to the top of the 18. 2nd and third chance shots from there weren’t accurate.The lower service plays were more effective than aerial ones. 

…………

71st minute. Stram played it on the ground long ball up to Smith from 20 top of the box, 1 touch to Larson to Miler in traffic. But her touch pass to Smith all alone was knocked away by Abel. 

 

2 additional ensuing chances. Loose ball for Gaebe wise edge of the 18 to the 8, but a soft shot wide as help defense arrived. Schwartz from Smith, missed wide from 20 on her opposite foot.

 

Larson diagonal back post cross for Sawyer at the 6 yard box, but her finish went wide as she collided with the goalkeeper. 

………..

SLU goal was a play that seemed similar to many in the game. 50/50 ball midfield, Simon lobbed it high behind the defense. Gaebe won it over Abel, but help defense arrived. Gaebe’s shot inside the 18 was blocked but with a hand that time. Heavy SLU pressure much of the half and game finally resulted in a Heckel PK goal in the 80th minute. The shot looked like it could have gone either way in without the hand ball. Good call. 1-1.

……………

84th minute Le played a long ball that skipped past Abel. Gaebe ran on to it with Abel draped on to her left side all the way to the 6 yard box, but left foot shot wide for Gaebe. 

……………

At least a dozen or more high level 2nd half chances not including deep territorial play for SLU in the 2nd half. 

…………..

[courtside]

SLU will likely have to win the A10 Tourney to receive an NCAA bid. It wasn’t expected, as expectations are high annually. But, there is a lot of regular season left, as well as postseason. Lots to play for to make another NCAA Tourney run. 

SLU’s RPI is now at 53.

Non-Conference opponent’s RPI

Penn State 9

BYU 28

Xavier 30

…………

Creighton 78.

KC 125

Mizzou 148

Missouri State 187

SIUE 291

……………

[courtside]

1 hour ago, slufanskip said:

And she also has 49 shots. There is absolutely no question her finishing has been off this year. She’s no doubt one of the best forwards in college soccer but she needs to be on target and finish better. 

So much goes into scoring. I’ve never been a fan of the shots on goal stat. I prefer quality chances that sometimes don’t even result in a shot at all.

Use Gaebe as the example. She is 13th nationally in shots per game. She is 17th nationally in shots on goal per game. But she isn’t top 50 in goals scored per game. 

Emily has had many point blank chances this year. Many were saved right on by the keeper, (on goal) or they were put frequently high. She’s fared better sometimes with lower corner placement. 

Last night she had a few point blank chances that she missed and she had a few that she didn’t make the extra pass to an open teammate for a higher percentage chance. And she had several blocked in a crowd of defenders. It was her highest shot total in a game this season. Emily could easily have double her goal output or more at this time. A bit unlucky and a bit needing more efficient placement finishing. 

As for scoring, it’s a collective group effort, and SLU isn’t getting enough from a wide variety of places. 

[slufanskip]

19 hours ago, courtside said:

So much goes into scoring. I’ve never been a fan of the shots on goal stat. I prefer quality chances that sometimes don’t even result in a shot at all.

Use Gaebe as the example. She is 13th nationally in shots per game. She is 17th nationally in shots on goal per game. But she isn’t top 50 in goals scored per game. 

Emily has had many point blank chances this year. Many were saved right on by the keeper, (on goal) or they were put frequently high. She’s fared better sometimes with lower corner placement. 

Last night she had a few point blank chances that she missed and she had a few that she didn’t make the extra pass to an open teammate for a higher percentage chance. And she had several blocked in a crowd of defenders. It was her highest shot total in a game this season. Emily could easily have double her goal output or more at this time. A bit unlucky and a bit needing more efficient placement finishing. 

As for scoring, it’s a collective group effort, and SLU isn’t getting enough from a wide variety of places. 

I’m with you on the shots on goal as a gauge for scoring chances. I just used it because it was used on the post I was responding to. I’ve said it numerous times, I go by what I’d call a dangerous or quality scoring chance. 
 

There can be a cross that’s misses a head by 6 inches and it’s not a shot or a shot that lobs into the keep from 30 yards and it’s a shot on goal. Or a shot 8 feet over from 20 yards.

 

Emily has been off this year. On one of her long runs down the middle she pushed her dribble too far out front allowing the keeper to challenge her and rush her shot. We need her to find her mojo and finish like she’s proven she’s capable of. She consistently creates dangerous chances, many times on her own, she just needs the last piece 

 

I believe she’ll come around. She’s just too good not to

[courtside]

1 hour ago, slufanskip said:

I’m with you on the shots on goal as a gauge for scoring chances. I just used it because it was used on the post I was responding to. I’ve said it numerous times, I go by what I’d call a dangerous or quality scoring chance. 
 

There can be a cross that’s misses a head by 6 inches and it’s not a shot or a shot that lobs into the keep from 30 yards and it’s a shot on goal. Or a shot 8 feet over from 20 yards.

 

Emily has been off this year. On one of her long runs down the middle she pushed her dribble too far out front allowing the keeper to challenge her and rush her shot. We need her to find her mojo and finish like she’s proven she’s capable of. She consistently creates dangerous chances, many times on her own, she just needs the last piece 

 

I believe she’ll come around. She’s just too good not to

Yep. I could have made my post more of a general reply. My point is I don’t care if a shot hits the post or goes over the bar vs being on goal. Sometimes those are closer or more dangerous shots than from 30-40 yards. BYU and Xavier had  some of those at times and they were fine. 

Even expected goals or xG which has value, has some limitations. But against Penn State for example it showed some pretty one sided stats for SLU for 70 minutes, and much of it near the 6. 

Emily was obviously frustrated not only during the Loyola game but the accumulation of things this season. So she took matters into her own hands more in the game. But if you do that you have to finish a few. 

Emily has missed at least a handful of super high quality close in chances, not always easy to make, in almost every game. She easily could have twice as many goals as she has now. Caroline Kelly had an issue a few seasons ago where she had some trouble getting her shots down. It's a little bit similar. Convert even just a few of those and 0-1-3 games could have been 4-0. Having an extra attacker producing results helps. And SLU has a little less of that this year. Snd thar for me says more about a couple of the middle classes and transfer portal than it does not returning a 5th year player. I think she’ll get it going to her elite standard. And I think some others will too. Group effort and group results are needed from a variety of players.

SLU had 25 shots vs Loyola. And some were dangerous. But many were blocked from distance, or not dangerous enough, especially compared to some other games. Shot volume has value. So does efficiency. It’s a combination. SLU used to win a ton of corners. But with SLU not being as dangerous on corners this season. the value of getting them isn’t the same. 

At times the 4-2-3-1 isn’t producing enough goals compared to the past few seasons. And at times even the 4-1-3-2 hasn’t as well. And that formation opens the middle of the field more where those players have to be good. And it means the back 4-5 have to defend more in transition, not a strength this year.

I’m still going with the 4-1–3-2, but with Larson in the midfield. 

Margins are small as SLU could very easily have a top 20 RPI right now. I think establishing a consistent level of focus. front foot, sharp play regardless of opponent for a full 90 will do it. Still plenty of time to get it going at a higher level. The practice/training grind is the place to be. 

[courtside]

On 9/27/2024 at 3:43 PM, courtside said:

SLU will likely have to win the A10 Tourney to receive an NCAA bid. It wasn’t expected, as expectations are high annually. But, there is a lot of regular season left, as well as postseason. Lots to play for to make another NCAA Tourney run. 

SLU’s RPI is now at 53.

Non-Conference opponent’s RPI

Penn State 9

BYU 28

Xavier 30

…………

Creighton 78.

KC 125

Mizzou 148

Missouri State 187

SIUE 291

……………

RPI Through Sunday:

SLU 46 

Penn State 9

BYU 26

Xavier 35

Creighton 90

Mizzou 122

KC 148

Missouri State 157

SIUE 305

……………

A10 top 100

UMass 53

Loyola 54

Dayton 68

Duquesne 71

[courtside]

22 hours ago, courtside said:

RPI Through Sunday:

SLU 46 

Penn State 9

BYU 26

Xavier 35

Creighton 90

Mizzou 122

KC 148

Missouri State 157

SIUE 305

……………

A10 top 100

UMass 53

Loyola 54

Dayton 68

Duquesne 71

SLU is 44 after BYU Mondays. 

(BYU doesn’t play on Sundays)

[Billfan7]

Where did Alyssa Bockius go?

[courtside]

2 hours ago, Billfan7 said:

Where did Alyssa Bockius go?

Alyssa left the team in August. She is doing individual and small group workouts this semester with a former professional soccer player/soccer trainer that works with local club and college teams, including SLU.