|
|
Post by Big D on Aug 21, 2007 20:49:26 GMT -6
Well tomorrow is the first exhibition game of the 07-08 season. We play Michigan State on the road. Will we destroy them or will they play us tough?
What do the soccer junkies think of the team this year? Can we repeat last season? Can we do better than last season? Will we take the Horizon again? Hopefully we can keep the momentum going...
|
|
|
|
Post by Big D on Aug 22, 2007 12:11:08 GMT -6
By the way,
Does anyone think it's a slap in the face that we're not ranked in the preseason top 25 in the NSCAA/Adidas poll?
Granted, we did receive votes. But after being ranked for most of last year, finishing with the 4th best defense in NCAA history, and making it to the Sweet 16, you'd think we would get some more respect.
Are we dropped solely because we lost Skroce?
Geez...looks like we'll have to prove ourselves again..something I think we can do.
|
|
|
|
Post by soccer fan on Aug 22, 2007 12:53:31 GMT -6
The Flames are returning most of their starters, including the defense, so they are starting off with a good nucleus. The two key newcomers, in my opinion, are Spiess and Younger.
Spiess is our number 10 this year. In soccer, that number is traditionally given to the go-to scorer, which means Spiess is expected to either lead the offense, or pose enough of a threat to keep the defenses from ganging up on Zambrano and Dunjer, both of whom need to increase their offensive production over last season. If Spiess is unable to establish himself as a consistent threat, someone else will have to, or the Flames' offense will suffer, and since it wasn't that good last season anyway, they will win fewer games.
Younger looks like a capable replacement for Kosek, and if he proves to be, we can expect a solid team defensively once again.
Other key newcomers are Mo Diallo, and Stevan Jovcic, two 6-2 175 pounders who will give the Flames some size and strength, somebody named Charlie Trout from England who nobody seems to know much about but is rumored to be really good. We'll fnd out soon enough.
John Trask's recruiting class was ranked 29th in the nation in one of those meaningless polls people love to argue about. I don't believe that included Spiess, who was recruited last season, or Younger, who started in the spring, or Trout, or any or the other last minute recruits, so where this incoming group really ranks is something we could debate for hours.
What I find most encouraging is that all these key newcomers are coming to a team that was already extremely good. Usually, when you lose key players, you call it a rebuilding year and write it off. But not these Flames.
It is hard to say how it will all shake out, given the number of unknowns, but my gut tells me that UIC will be at or near the top of the Horizon League. I also don't believe the season will be considered a success if they don't make the NCAA tournament.
As far as not getting a ranking, I don't see how a team that struggled offensively and lost its offensive captain could be ranked in the top 25. How do you improve on the best defense in the nation? You can't, which is why everything hinges on the offense. Because of the departure of Skroce, any improvements are 100% speculation. If the Flames can prove they have more offensive punch, at least a top-20 consensus should be do-able, and even higher should be possible. But like I said, it is hard to predict anything with so many unprovens.
Note to moderator:
If people want to discuss the soccer team here, it might make more sense to upgrade the "UIC Soccer" subject to a place where threads for the various games and (hopefully) rankings can be started. Consider adding "Other UIC Sports" to the main section, and making "UIC Soccer" a directory within it. That way, soccer talk won't dominate "Off Topic".
If UICHoops would prefer NOT to host soccer discussion (I wouldn't blame you, it is a basketball website after all), there is a thread "UIC-Horizon League, 2007" in BigSoccer.com that hasn't been posted to for a while, and soccer discussion could be directed there.
Whichever way you prefer (add new section for soccer, direct soccer posts to BigSoccer.com, or let soccer dominate off topic like it did last year), let us know by replying to this post. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by UICJohn on Aug 22, 2007 14:02:02 GMT -6
I am personally very excited to see how this season pans out. Yes, our defense is basically all back. But replacing our best offensive player from last season is quite a task.
As was pointed out, Spiess and Younger are the two young guys who have to step up. The only thing I know about any of the new players is what I read. But what I read about Younger is that he is a big, physical defenseman and I think we could use some more size on our defense. He has played on National teams in England, so experience should be there.
Spiess was the All American who is now a starter. Dundjer had a solid year last year, but did somewhat disappoint. He needs to step up a little more and if him, Zambrano, and Spiess can all make big contributions, our offense should be improved. Add to that, Diallo and Stoll (the new recruit from the same program as Spiess), we should have some young guys who can really contribute.
I agree that it's a great sign that we have some good recruits coming in to a team what is already good. Hopefully Spiess will hit the ground running seeing as he's been around the team for a year already. Also, him and Younger have participated in some of the team scrimmages, like against the Fire.
I have to admit, I have heard nothing of Charlie Trout before today, but if we have another solid recruit, then that's all the better.
|
|
|
|
Post by FuryJP on Aug 22, 2007 22:30:26 GMT -6
UIC loses 2-1. And Yes, I do think we should have been ranked top 25.
|
|
|
|
Post by soccer fan on Aug 23, 2007 7:59:56 GMT -6
Yeah, I was surprised to see us losing to a bottom-feeder like Michigan State, and disappointed to see we gave up two goals, but when I looked at the box score, I didn't feel quite so bad.
They started three freshmen and substituted three others. Spiess and Younger didn't even play. Zambrano was a substitue. This was obviously neither the starting lineup nor the kind of substitutions that would be made during the regular season.
I am still not happy to see the Flames' defense giving up two goals, though. Sounds like they've got a little work to do. The Flames need more depth across the board than last season if they are going to make a serious run, and it looks like they haven't got it on the defensive side - yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by Big D on Aug 23, 2007 9:33:29 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by UICJohn on Aug 23, 2007 10:08:50 GMT -6
I agree. After looking at the box score, I figured it was just looked at as something to get the newer players into their first game. When I saw that some of our regulars saw no playing time at all, wasn't nearly as disappointed with the outcome. Gave up two goals, yes. But remember, just an exhibition. I believe two more exhibitions to go so there is some work to do but some time to do it in.
|
|
|
|
Post by Big D on Aug 25, 2007 19:49:30 GMT -6
Maybe I misread the score, but I thought I saw UIC lost to IUPUI 5-0. Exhibition or not, that is not a good sign....
Edit: Nope, IUPUI's site had the wrong score initially. They fixed it so we won 5-0....that's more of what I expected...
|
|
|
|
Post by uic53 on Sept 1, 2007 20:12:03 GMT -6
My wife and I are going to our first UIC soccer game tomorrow night. I really can't wait! Is anyone else here planning on going? I think we will hit Greek Town for an early dinner and head on over for the game. If there are two coaches who deserve some attention on campus they are John Trask and Mike Dee! These two have turned a couple of sleeper teams into some nationally recognized programs. Good luck tomorrow night Flames!
|
|
|
|
Post by soccer fan on Sept 3, 2007 19:51:14 GMT -6
I was out of the country, so I couldn't make it to the game, but could anyone who was there post a summary? The official Flame website says it was an offensive show, and it says the Fury came out for the game and made a lot of noise. Can anyone verify?
|
|
|
|
Post by UICJohn on Sept 3, 2007 20:35:03 GMT -6
The offense looked pretty quick. They were moving the ball well and dominated the first half despite the 0-0 score. After taking a 2-0 lead, kind of got sloppy and gave up the goal but answered back.
It was a pretty one sided affair. While the offense did make some mistakes (granted, the first game with 4 Frosh starting) I can see them being a pretty good offensive club as the season goes on.
|
|
|
|
Post by Big D on Sept 9, 2007 9:27:32 GMT -6
UIC showed last night that they mean business this year. At Rutgers, which went into the season ranked (at #24, I believe), UIC played to a scoreless tie. However, the important thing is that they outplayed Rutgers and they even gave themselves a chance to win with a penalty kick at the end. Unfortunately, their goaltender came up with a good save, and it ended 0-0.
Continuing to play well on the road at tough opponents' places is a great sign. Hopefully we can keep it up because we have lots of road contests coming up...
|
|
|
|
Post by soccer fan on Sept 9, 2007 12:27:49 GMT -6
Two comments:
1. Holding Rutgers scoreless at home is very encouraging. Sounds like the Flames defense is getting back to mid-season form, and if that is the case, that bodes well for this season.
2. The attendance was 891, which is a decent crowd, but not all that much bigger than UIC was drawing at the end of last season.
|
|
|
|
Post by UICAndrew on Sept 18, 2007 21:51:06 GMT -6
reading the box score of the uic/western match and it says there were 1,032 people there....not surprised...the place was packed. i think i remember them saying there was just over 300 students too. thats more than almost every basketball game we have...
|
|
