Player rotation leads Seneca Valley girls soccer to success
Calling something a team effort is more than a cliché for top-ranked Seneca Valley.
The Raiders (15-2-1) rotate as many as 19 players, often substituting like a hockey team changing lines.
“We probably sub five or six girls at a time and stay pretty consistent,” head coach Dave Sylvester said. “There's not much of a drop-off. We're fortunate in that respect.”
Caroline Miller, Kelsey O'Connor, Emily Wagner, Sarah Anderson, Megan Majeski and Myra Charles all have at least five goals.
Marykate Zahorchak has been a consistent presence in the midfield. Alicia Hart and Lexus Lambert anchor the defense.
Goalkeeper Jess Neill, a three-year starter who has a section record of 32-2-2, has helped Seneca Valley to seven shutouts and 14 goals allowed.
The most enjoyable shutout was no doubt a 3-0 victory over Peters Township on Sept. 28. The Indians beat Seneca Valley in the WPIAL Class AAA championship game and again in the PIAA quarterfinals last season.
“Us and Peters have a little bit of a history,” Sylvester said. “Last year both of those games could've gone either way. Definitely the kids who have played in it and have been a part of it … I don't want to say they had that circled on their calendar, but they definitely were looking at that.”
• Mars' 2-0 home loss to Mt. Lebanon Monday was the Planets' first against a WPIAL team since the second game of the 2012 season, a 38-game stretch where Mars, the three-time defending WPIAL Class AA champion, went 34-1-3. That lone loss was to Mercyhurst Prep in the 2012 PIAA quarterfinals.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.