3/28/07 Division A Poll is out!

[i <3 LAX]

As a coach at Chapman University i would like to shed some light on the subject that yall are debating. The team is currently in the process of fighting the decision, and i am confident that all of the facts pertaining to the sanctions will come to light in the next few weeks. In terms of the polls if we are reinstated, we are confident that our perfromance over the next 5 games (CSU, CU, Oregon, Utah, UCSB) will be reflected in the upcoming polls.

[CATLAX MAN]

Thank you for your post, coach. It's an unfortunate situation.

What some people don't seem to get here is that a public expanation is not due to anyone from the WCLL Board or the MCLA board. The only people who are due an explanation are the parties involved. The continued public griping about that is not going to change that fact. The parties involved (Chapman, WCLL & MCLA) have had and will have their say through the proper channels and appeals. Those meetings and appeals are closed for a reason.....the one John Paul has already explained. It is not necessary for everyone to be privy to all of the details. Deal with it.

[Matt_Gardiner]

If you are planning on fighting the decision based on thinking the punishment is too extreme, I think it should put wether or not the punishment is too light back on the table. It is most sensible that if you are asking that the punishment be adjusted that it can be adjusted in either direction (or not at all).

Eligibility violations are typically honest mistakes that all but one person on the team is oblivious to. It does not change wether or not they should be punished. The disparate impact that player may have had on multiple teams can be substantial when you add them all up. Reseeding the playoffs. All-Conference Recognition. Wins and loses. Goalie saves. Your team agreed to the rules of eligibility and has most likely benefitted from the rules of eligibility up until now. How would you feel if your team lost a first round bye, ranking slot, playoff appearance, or a player's recognition because of another team not playing by the rules? Just something to consider.

[onpoint]

Lucky for us, Catlax Man is privy to how eligibility issues can potentially ruin seasons. You should heed his words . . .

This league has already proven that short of legal threat, the death penalty is the path of least resistance. Regardless of the facts of this particular case, I still maintain that there is an absolute lack of protocol by which different eligibility violations would warrant different punishments. As far as I can tell, each violation can only possibly have one result.

[Jolly Roger]

While I'll agree that certain aspects of protocol should be public, I'll also state that eligibility is the cornerstone of our organization and ANY proven violation therein must be dealt with severely. The only things that conferences (or the MCLA) hold over a team is membership, post season participation and awards.

[Danny Hogan]

precedent the word is precedent

[mholtz]

I had no idea you were on any executive board Catlaxman? You sound like you have all the answers and assume that there were no flaws to the WCLL or MCLA decisions. They always say they are precedence driven, but this polls decision does not seem to have any relavant precedence to pull from. I just hope that all the facts come forward from both sides. Sounds like Chapman is going to fight it, so I am sure that will happen.

Actually, a few years back Michigan State was removed from the polls, and from post season play for self reporting a player that dropped a class to move below 12 credits. There is precedence.

What year, and were they suspended from the polls in the same season that it took place?

2004 and yes because we self reported that year 1/2 way through the season.

Oakland also had an ineligible player as deemed by the BOD but this was noted the year after it occured. They were not allowed to participate in the National tourney that year or the polls.

CSU was in the polls a few years back but their problem wasn't noted until the very end of the regular season. They were no longer in the polls after that.

For the last few years I've run the polling process from a programming aspect, so I am aware of every team that is in or out. I only say that to show that I am not totally an outsider in the process. I have zero say in the process (unless it involves a CCLA-A division team) but I do get the "order" to remove team X or team Y from the polling. I've never gotten any more explanation than "the MCLA/USL-MDIA board has removed team X from the polls."

[onpoint]

The only things that conferences (or the MCLA) hold over a team is membership, post season participation and awards.

This is a very good point and I agree with you here - though I do believe that "going to 11" (Spinal Tap reference) is not always necessary in EVERY case. I think it's also important to keep in mind that outside of a very few schools in our organization, we are still CLUB after all, and most teams are held at the mercy of their players. It's unfortunate, but a fact, that one player can take down an entire team.

Obviously I have biased emotions about this issue and it certainly heats me up a little bit. I do agree that we all must be held to some level of eligibility accountability and I commend the MCLA for implementing the third eligibility check after the last withdrawal period (which all but makes it impossible for a player to drop below the minimum # of credits without being a complete jerk). But, to quote someone I am very close to, there is no reason to turn this all into the NCAA.

Just to clarify, I have no connection with the Chapman case and have no ideas about the details surrounding it.

[mholtz]

I think it's also important to keep in mind that outside of a very few schools in our organization, we are still CLUB after all, and most teams are held at the mercy of their players.

I must strongly disagree with this point. As long as we allow ourselves to have the mindset of "club" teams, we will be doomed to that fate. Until more and more teams take on the mindset of "virtual varsity" we will wallow in the mediocrity as a league that is typically associated with "club" lax.

As a coach of (at least I think it is) the first fairly major school to have sanctions placed on it by the MDIA/MCLA/Whatever it was called in 2004, I can say that sanctions suck, but in our case we used it as a learning experience, and a means to show the players that were interested in our program that this isn't just a beer league. This is serious stuff.

I think that the BOD sanctioning what would have been the #1 seed CSU, and the CCLA champion Oakland team a few years back shows that they take it seriously.

The BOD takes it seriously, it's time for the rest of the teams to take themselves seriously.

My point is that ultimately (at least I feel this way) my goal as a coach at this level is to create the best possible environment for my coaching staff, and players. The more serious we take it, the better the environment. If kids want a club in our area there are at least 3 they can choose from that will play only sunday day games, 5 or 6 times a year, but they don't choose this. They choose to be serious, and dedicate the time it takes to make a program successful.

[John Paul]

This message board is not the forum for an MCLA EB member to comment on this case or any case. In fact, the only public forum for comment is during MCLA BOD meetings, which are open to everyone. At those meetings (next one is August, exact dates and location TBD), the entire BOD, and through conference representatives the entire membership, are updated on anything official that is going on.

The only thing I'll say about the Chapman case, which has already been mentioned in this thread, is that this was a WCLL matter. The MCLA EB simply reviewed the WCLL decision, as our rules state me must, and we approved it. We also added that Chapman be removed from the polls for this year.

As a matter of general principle - we decided several years ago that the one thing we would enforce with an absolute iron fist is eligibility. Eligibility is the cornerstone of our organization. Is it hard to monitor? Hell yes. Can one player, if he is devious, bring down a top team for a year? Also yes. We are all at risk of that. Can a coach, if he is not on top of it, make a mistake that can cost his team? Yes again. We ask all MCLA teams to be diligent about a lot of things, but this is the one issue we hold everyone to an absolute standard about.

And believe me, as someone who worked in D1 athletics and is still pretty close to it, we are not even touching the surface of being anything like the NCAA.

[gobblerlax05]

there might be some bumping because get this on friday night va tech will play fla at vt's turf so maybe the contiversay will be done after this one! aight?

[laxfan25]

there might be some bumping because get this on friday night va tech will play fla at vt's turf so maybe the contiversay will be done after this one! aight?

durn strate not jus whislin in the dark!

[Beta]

there might be some bumping because get this on friday night va tech will play fla at vt's turf so maybe the contiversay will be done after this one! aight?

durn strate not jus whislin in the dark!

ist wehn they umphy lik that their liek the platypus!!1!!

[Sonny]

there might be some bumping because get this on friday night va tech will play fla at vt's turf so maybe the contiversay will be done after this one! aight?

STOP THE INSANITY!

You should look into that handy dandy spellcheck button sometime Gobbler. All the kids are doing it.

[Adam G]

there might be some bumping because get this on friday night va tech will play fla at vt's turf so maybe the contiversay will be done after this one! aight?

I still think these posts are the funniest posts to read first thing in the morning at work.