Men's College Cup: Another amazing run ends with Stanford threepeat

Stanford became only the second team to win three straight NCAA Division I men's championships when it beat Indiana, 1-0, in Sunday's final at Talen Energy Stadium in Chester, Pa.

Sam Werner, a junior from Montana by way of the Portland Timbers academy, scored the golden goal in the second overtime when he took the ball away from Indiana's Griffin Dorsey at the top of the area, fell to his knee but quickly recovered and slotted a shot over Hoosier freshman keeper Trey Muse and under the crossbar for the winning goal.
 


Werner said he wasn't sure what happened but he was happy to decide the game in overtime and not have to go to penalty kicks, where the Cardinal beat Wake Forest to win the 2016 title on Werner's penalty kick in the sixth round.

“It felt great," he said. "It certainly took some pressure off, getting one in overtime.”

The three-peat was the first since Bruce Arena led Virginia to four straight titles in 1991-94. Five other times, teams have tried to win a third straight championship and lost in the final: Saint Louis (1964, 1971 and 1974), San Francisco (1977) and Indiana (1984).

“We’ve been fortunate enough through our hard work to be standing and celebrating at the end of the season three times," said Stanford head coach Jeremy Gunn, who has won three Division I title at Stanford and one Division II championship at Fort Lewis. “It’s really, really cool. We get the success at the end, saying that we’re champions, and to have that three times is amazing. It really is.”

With Sunday's victory, Stanford also became the first Division I school to win national titles in both men's and women's soccer in the same season.

NCAA DI men's repeat champions:
YEARS TEAM
2015-17 Stanford
2003-04 Indiana
1998-99 Indiana
1991-94 Virginia
1982-83 Indiana
1975-76 San Francisco
1972-73 Saint Louis
1969-70 Saint Louis
1967-68 *Michigan State
1962-63 Saint Louis
1959-60 Saint Louis
*Co-champion both years.

The Cardinal had the edge in shots -- 13-5 -- but neither team could score before Werner's goal. Muse, who spent last summer with the Sounders FC 2 in the USL, made good stops on Bryce Marion and Corey Baird.

The Stanford shutout was the 12th in a row, extending to more than 1,214 minutes -- an NCAA record -- and marking the two consecutive NCAA Tournament in which the Cardinal didn't allow a goal.

"I don't think what it means to us and what it means to the university and program will sink in for a few weeks," said senior defender Tomas Hilliard-Arce, one of four starters on all three championship teams and a possible No. 1 pick in the 2018 MLS SuperDraft.

The loss was the first of the season for Indiana, which finished with an 18-1-6 record.

“It’s a tough one,” Hoosiers coach Todd Yeagley said. “Griff thought he had a little window to make the play. The kid finished it really well. It won’t be our focus certainly, but it’s one that we’ll learn from. The overtime is tough, it’s so sudden. We felt really good heading into that period.”

Dec. 10 in Chester, Pa.
Stanford 1 Indiana 0 (OT). Goals: Werner 103.
Stanford -- Corti, Beason, Hilliard-Arce, Mosharrafa, L.Panchot, Marion, Gilbey, Skundrich, Werner, Langsdorf, Baird. Subs: Vom Steeg, Bashti, Wehan, Waldeck.
Indiana -- Muse, Lillard, Gutman, Buckmaster, Mehl, Swartz, Thomas, A.Panchot, Moore, Dorsey, Toye. Subs: Hyacenth, Rennicks.
Att.: 5,764.
20 comments about "Men's College Cup: Another amazing run ends with Stanford threepeat".
  1. frank schoon, December 11, 2017 at 10:38 a.m.

    I'm sorry to say but the level of soccer displayed was just AWFUL! It looked liked both teams before the game decided they wanted to set a new Guiness world record of most long balls (Boomballs) kicked in a game. I have tapes of NCAA championship soccer games going back into 80's that played more sophisticated than this garbage. REALIZE the players of both teams  represent the better players in America,  trained by Developmental Academies, some play for MLS academies, and others play for the National youth teams; in other words all are heavily recruited players becuase of their playing abilities, of which I certainly question. So many bad passes, of which I thought, is the receiving player suppose to catch a bus to get there. It reminded me of an English 4th division game where they run around with foam on their mouths...
    Here is the problem, American players can not play under high defensive pressure, in small spaces, for they lack good ball handling skills in tight spaces. They are not good enough techically, in tight 1v1 ball situations and as a result blast the ball downfield.  Do you think that two top universities in soccer in South America, let us say, in  Argentina would have displayed long ball soccer when putting players under pressure, ofcourse not for they have good individual ball skills, which we lack. 
    OUR PLAYERS ARE NOT EQUIPPED TECHNICALLY AND MENTALLY WITH A BALL WHEN PLACED UNDER PRESSSURE SITUATIONS IN SMALL SPACES. 
    You really have to QUESTION the POOR training and development of OUR players in the past dozen years or so by the Developmental Academies : not to mention the money spend by the parents.

  2. Wooden Ships replied, December 11, 2017 at 11:38 a.m.

    Frank, as always you call it as you see it and as it is. Too many don’t believe that there was better technical skills in the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s. I mean that just can’t be so, but it is, at least with those of us in a few pockets around the country. We have 50 fold the numbers today, but less polish. The small percentage of us that realize are drowned out by the machine and those that have been defending this debacle the last 3 decades will not admit this mistake. I tuned in for a few minutes and decided to vacuum my Jeep instead. Happy for the players and all that get excited on their behalf.

  3. frank schoon replied, December 11, 2017 at 12:33 p.m.

    SHIPS, Vacuum my jeep,LOLOLOLOLOLOL.
     Although Ajax of 70's and Dutch Team of WC'74 introduced high pressure soccer, Barcelona under Guardiola in late 90's re-introduced high pressure soccer. Like Cruyff stated, a real good soccer player is one that can handle the ball in small spaces. Anybody with plenty of space can look like a star with the ball. I blame The USSF Coaching School/ Academy for their lack of awareness of failing to see  the trend of high pressure defense and its effect upon how players should be technically and mentally trained to survive with the ball under pressure in small spaces.
    My suggestion to coaches as a first step is in practice to play 11v11 on a half field with full goals. I did this when I coached high school. we practiced everyday 11v11 half field. After having complaining the first 2 weeks about the lack of space, which is totally bogus,  they  refused to play full field for it was so boring. It made them think faster, concentrate more, looks for space and position more sharply. If they complain in the beginning then take all 22 players and pack them into about 4square yards and then tell them look out there and see all the space they have to play in which is about 3000 square yards. It is all relative. Another practice is to play 5v5 with two fullsized goals with the other placed on the edge of the penalty box, with goalies. The size of the field is the penalty box..These two exercises were employed by Michels/Cruyff's Ajax and WC'74 Dutch team.

  4. Wooden Ships replied, December 11, 2017 at 3:47 p.m.

    I’ve used the same training with players myself. I first experienced a similar training (formally anyway) from our resident Yugoslav in 67. Reduced space was pretty much a staple in St. Louis and pickup games as well. Until our adults allow the kids to take ownership of their own game, we will continue to not have the truly talented players on the ball. 

  5. frank schoon replied, December 11, 2017 at 5 p.m.

    Ships, so true, structure and organization has stifled creativeness of the player.
    Your resident Yugosav came from a country I did so admire in ball handling skills.
    Dzajic ,what a player. Played for Red Star...one of the best ever. I know Brazil wanted to play Yugoslavia in friendlies for Yugoslavia in those days were considered the Brazil of Europe and because they wanted to play against Dzajic. I still watch on Youtube some of WC'74 games of Yugoslavia.  At one time Beckenbauer considered him the best player in Europe. Yugoslavia produced so many great Individualists. Sekularic, was a nutcase but he was credited with the rainbow move. In the '62 WC ,he was found playing a pick up game in a park a couple of hours before the game. 

  6. Bob Ashpole replied, December 14, 2017 at 6:44 p.m.

    My pet theory is that the decline is not due to coaching or changes during the development cycle. I think the problem is a decline in emotional, physical, and mental development in children at the time that they begin the development cycle. Changes in child rearing practices have a downside in child development. Our society has become extremely sedentary and impatient for "results."

  7. James Madison, December 11, 2017 at 9:23 p.m.


    Watch the tape, guys.  Given the ability and willingness of both teams to apply pressure all over the field, it was impressive that the players of both teams responded as well as they did.  Stanford also impressed with the accuracy of their long balls.  I can remember Bob Gansler, a stickler for techniqne, saying that one test of a top level player is the ability to send a 50-meter pass to a teammate in full stride.

  8. frank schoon replied, December 12, 2017 at 10:25 a.m.

    JAMES, your statement about accurate long ball passes made me laugh for it reminded me of a youth soccer team back in Reston in the '80's that was successful because they had athletes ,big and strong. But as  for playing soccer, that was another matter. As I watched their game, I told one of the parents, describing their game as "Boomball". The response was, 'yeah, but they Boom it accurately"...cracked me up. Likewise, your suggestion they produce accurate long ball passes, is also a little too much. It is not difficult to kick a long ball downfield  for the receiver has time and space to react to how the ball is coming and therefore he's able to adjust to the pass. These long balls looks  so predictable, for you know it's coming. The way you can really judge a player's accuracy kicking/passing accuracy is for a player to make a diagonal cross to the other side of the field, in a manner the receiver to run on to it behing the defender or to his feet. But you won't see that kind of a pass for that takes real skill and dexterity as compared to a vertical downfield... There were so many passes, and I'm not even talking about long ones also inaccurate.  This particular game shows you that the better players, highly recruited, trained quite a few years by the Academies, playing for the National team and represent MLS academies 
    have no answer to high pressure, other than whacking it long....What a waste of years of training for they can't do anything better than that...

  9. Right Winger, December 12, 2017 at 3:46 p.m.

    Frank, you have to quit holding back on your thoughts.  Lol.  There were two expressions of happiness when this game was over.  One was Stanford because they won and the other was the game ball because both teams kicked the crap out of it.

  10. frank schoon replied, December 12, 2017 at 4:45 p.m.

    LOLOLOLOLOL

  11. R2 Dad, December 12, 2017 at 9:17 p.m.

    Let's remember, these coaches choose these players, they decided to play this style, they decided everything. There is no excuse of limited transfer budgets, lack of skilled players available. And yet this is all you get. The first step to improve this pathetic situation is for the NCAA to change to a spring-fall season and FIFA regulations--then there will be a glimmer of light at the end of this long dark tunnel.

  12. frank schoon replied, December 13, 2017 at 9:56 a.m.

    R2, you're right these coaches chose the players but they were the among best of the player pool to choose from, therefore I can't fault them on that. I can't fault them for the style they chose, by which I think you mean high pressure defense, for I would have chosen this too; because this is the opponent's weakspot.  As a result both teams nullified each other.
    What it comes down to is that  these coaches have a player pool to choose from whom have not been trained and developed well...It is that simple.
    Your suggestion of extending the season to the Spring to improve the quality of play, I think this is what you mean, will not help.
    First of all ,college soccer has its focus on winning the championship, team oriented training, preparing for the next game.
    The problem is developing players which is already too late to initiate at this stage. These players are not good at ball handling skills under pressure in small spaces. This particular weakness can be found world wide found in different degrees and this is why Guardiola's Barcelona was so successful, employing the 5 second pressure rule. Now realize Barcelona played against teams who train and play full time 10months a year pro ball and therefore, extending the college has nothing to do with improving the quality and development of the players for the solution to this problem is to be found way before these players ever get to college. In sum ,the ACADEMIES, whether at club level or at MLS, as well the current TRAINING AND COACHING methods as taught by the USSF coaching school have FAILED, there is no other excuse for it.!!!

  13. humble 1, December 13, 2017 at noon

    The NCAA final is great example of how College and HS rules really hurt the game.  Look at the final.  The (seemingly) limitless substitions actually enable excessive high pressing, which hinders the ground game.  Standford used 15 players, not too bad right, there was OT, so three plus one, under current FIFA rules with the new OT sub allowance, but wait!, they actually used 14 substitutions!  IU used 13 players, also sounds normal, but they used eight substitutions!  It's a lot of work the high press, the substitution rules make it possible to press even more.  More-over, the semi finals were on Friday 08 Dec, the final on Sunday 10 Dec, only one day rest.  Does this impacts the quality of the game?  Could one argue the offensive players are more effected?  Remember, all these boys are on scholarship so they are required to 'protect' their amatuer status!  They cannot play with professionals or professional teams over their breaks!  We are talking about the main 'free'-way to soccer in the US - both literally and figuratively - HS and College - and they have these insane rules.  The end result is the kids can and do win - but really - they lose!  Look no further than the famous striker on Seattle that was part of one of the last Stanford championships for an example of of winning whilst putting at risk your true upside as an international player.  Stanford scholarship, now, playing for Seattle, with an MLS championship under his belt and having just participated in another.  But did he play a big role for the USA this summer, and did he play a big role for Seattle last and this year?  Can/will we ever achieve optimal success internationally as a nation whilst we have this 'free'-way that effectively seduces players (and parents) with scholarships and championship play and yet, that also may hinder players from developing their complete game?

  14. frank schoon replied, December 13, 2017 at 1:45 p.m.

    Humble 1, I get your point, but I watched the game and the amount of subbing coming into the game was normal for a typical college game. This has been a complaint for years, way before the recent high pressure defense became a trend. I'll put it more plainly, the amount of subbing as you state has nothing to do with the problem of players not being able not too handle a ball under high pressure defense, in small spaces, it all  has all to do with technique , ball handling skills, not too mention good positioning off the ball, body position stance in receiving and releasing the ball and one MORE thing the ability of able to use both feet and the ability ,team-wise, to employ 3rd man off the ball movement. There are so many developmental factors the college players lack and haven't been taught in order to counter the high pressure defense, and perform in small spaces.
    Cruyff stated the less technical the players are the more the " PHYSICAL" part of the game rules, and as a result subbing would have an effect, in that case. Players with lousy technical skills will always lose out when under pressure. Barcelona proved this point when Guardiola had a midfield of Iniesta, Busquets, and Xavi, players who were smart, were EXCELLENT IN BALLHANDLING SKILLS, were small, not fast, not physical not strong, not the fighting type but able to move the ball without having to run much. As a matter of fact Xavi average 7 kilometers of running per game as compared to the average idiot foam around the mouth midfielder of 12kilometers. Barcelona's midfield proved that you don't need big fast ,strong athletic types at midfield.( obviating the need for substituting)
    In other words ,you can bring in all the subs you want, let us say, but these subs no matter how fresh, how big, how fast, they CAN'T OUTRUN THE BALL. PERIOD. And that is what is soccer is all about..quick ball movement, continually movement off the ball and knowing where the ball should go next.
    Your "substitute' theory is fine if played on a soccer pitch twice the current size. But on a regular field it is all about "quick ball movement" for you can't OUT RUN THE BALL, regardless if you bring in a train load of subs . Players who lack good ball handlings will be have problems but well trained players able to use both feet in dribbling and passing, intelligently able to think a step ahead seeing the options will survive.
    So we go back and ask why don't we have players with good ballhandling skills in small spaces, and not able to use both feet which is so important in ball movement during positioning game. What is lacking in the developmental training of our ACADEMIES....as I stated before...IT IS ALL ABOUT GOOD DEVELOPMENT WHICH THE PLAYERS ARE NOT GETTING....

  15. Right Winger replied, December 13, 2017 at 3:13 p.m.

    Watching the u17's you could see that we had pretty good speed on the wings but when they came inside and were challenged it was all over.  There are many kids out there who have the ability to go one on one and do well but the coaching doesn't like it.  They want the quick hit and run and hope for the best.  The college stage is the same way.  It never used to be like that.  What the hell happened?

  16. frank schoon replied, December 13, 2017 at 4:55 p.m.

    Fan, that is a good question, what the hell happened? For one thing we don't stress individuality in our soccer program and it is not in our soccer DNA but ironically it is in our social culture. Our kids don't see enough individuality stressed in training and development and one of the reason ,sadly enough,is that today even our coaches are not from our generation who never grew seeing a Pele, Cruyff, Beckenbauer, Best, Garrincha, Maradona, Puskas, etc  all of the greats of the NASL.etc.....today a kid only hears or sees a Ronaldo or Messi , that's it.. Coaches today think of a Wiel Coerver tapes when it comes to teaching skills. Unlike today we didn't grow up with Wiel Coerver to learn skills and we were better skilled. Kids in Argentina or Brazil breath ball skills, individuality, no matter if it is functional or not but what is important is the DNA is there. Too much TEAM orientation is stressed instead of INDIVIDUALITY in the beginning stages. I'm willing to bet a kid today who plays wing has never heard or watch the moves of a Stanley Matthews, Garrincha, Jimmy Johnstone, David Ginola, Piet Keizer, Dzajic, Pepe, Gento, Best, Rensenbrink.. maybe a Robben perhaps but he couldn't even shine the shoes of these great players. I made sure the kids that I coach knew these players and what they could do with a ball and told anecdotes and stories about them and show tapes of them  in order stimulate their individual prowess. How can you really play the game and appreciate the beauty of the game without knowing the contributions of the great ones and to learn and copy their moves and style. I remember the story as told by George Best and Bobby Charlton who witnessed Ferenc Puskas in a contest hit the crossbar 9 in a row and and the tenth time he juggled, then on hit it on his shoulder then head and took a volley shot hitting the crossbar. Even the great Ernst Happel as told by Rensenbrink and Haan of Holland stated they saw him hit a coke bottle off the bar and when challenged did it again.
    Soccer coaches have gotten too sterile, they send kids home and tell them to work on their juggling. That is one thing we never did in street soccer , juggling??? Today, it is a big deal. We have to allow for individual creativeness, stress it, demand it. Coaches who don't understand shouldn't coach. It is not about how well the team does but how well have you improved your players and that is how a coach should be judged at the end of the season. Improving the coaching license is not high on my list of priorities for coaching is to team oriented occcupation  which sacrifices at the cost individual development..

  17. Bob Ashpole replied, December 14, 2017 at 7:05 p.m.

    Frank, I think the answer is simple and what you mentioned earlier.

    Straight ahead sprint speed is over rated. Quickness and agility are more important and will beat sprint speed every time if the player is smart. Technical skill and the smarts to use them are underrated.

    Fitness is not an issue because everyone in good health can get match fit.

  18. frank schoon replied, December 14, 2017 at 11:02 p.m.

    Bob, exactly. Being able to run fast has nothing to do with playing fast soccer.  That is why so many coaches have it all wrong about picking big ,fast and athletic players. Zinedine zidane , Romario, Messi, Neymar, Iniesta, Xavi, etc., are some of the great players with a ball, who are not big strong and fast. Fast soccer is so much a function of brains, ball handling skills, proper positioning off the ball, proper body stance in order to make the ball move faster to the next station, able to place the right speed on the pass, passing it in front of the receiver's directional run instead to his feet, fewest amount of necessary touches on the ball for further transport of the ball.

  19. humble 1, December 13, 2017 at 6:32 p.m.

    frank, I agree with you, except that maybe what you mean is not DNA, but rather culture.  As the ball control of what you speak is born not inherited, or the Argentines, Urugayan, Brazilian's born here would bring it.  What you speak of comes from culture and community.  Beginning in the home with dad, mum and siblings, then expanding to the local community clubs with adults and parents being involved.  Here I've seen the academies push away parents and volunteers, sometimes for good reason, but forgetting that the ultimate goals is to yes, have that culture begin in the home then bring the passion to the club the community.  This is the way it is in Uruguay and Argentina, the entire family is involved until baby futbol ends at 14. 

  20. frank schoon, December 14, 2017 at 9:29 a.m.

    Humble 1, of course it is not inherited, but ball control or ballhandling skills varies in degree depending on the culture as well. Although you make point about that it's not in the DNA, there is  a certain DNA, if you want to call it that that identifies or can be found in a specific country. The coach of the '78Argentinian that won the '78WC, Cesar Menotti, stated as much that within each country their is a certain DNA that's developed. For example, if I played a pick up game in Holland, and went to Germany and then went to France, even though they are European countries, I can detect a difference between these countries by how the players play together and how read and see the game. That's what I mean by DNA.  I do think you place too much of an importance on the parental influence. I grew up in the street soccer era in Europe,where there was zero parental influence.  As a matter of fact parents hardly ever came to watch youth games. The kids in those days had way better skills because they spend 20-30 hours a week playing soccer not due to any parental or community involvement.
    Maybe in South America the parents like to have more involvement for economic reasons to make their son a great players, but in Europe where the standard of living is much higher parents see soccer not  as a ticket out to  have better things, but instead see education as more of a ticket item

Next story loading loading..

Discover Our Publications