Graduate Students

[John Paul]

What's your question about him Alex?

He obviously burned a year for every year he played at his previous school. If he's a transfer (still an undergrad), he would still be eligible to play as long as he's taking 12 credit hours during the season and he hasn't played four years of college lacrosse already (each year defined as appearing on a roster as a non-redshirted player or playing in a game for any college team, at any level, ie. NCAA, NJCAA, MDIA, NCLL, non-affiliated college club, etc.)

[LaxRef]

I'm pretty sure that if you are a Graduate student you can only play for the school that you received your Undergraduate Degree from. In addition, I believe that Grad. Strudents must take 12 hours (even if their school says 9 is a full load). All in all, I think it is difficult to play as a Graduate Student in the USLIA-MDIA.

This is correct. The issue comes up every year, but I can confirm that two years ago SFU had a graduate student with no collegiate lacrosse experience who completed his undergraduate degree at a school with no lacrosse program. He was denied eligiblity.

Any idea what the reasoning for this decision was? Because unless there is another reason (e.g., not enough credits, gender reassignment surgery), that decision sounds asinine.

[pepsi24]

I'm pretty sure that if you are a Graduate student you can only play for the school that you received your Undergraduate Degree from. In addition, I believe that Grad. Strudents must take 12 hours (even if their school says 9 is a full load). All in all, I think it is difficult to play as a Graduate Student in the USLIA-MDIA.

This is correct. The issue comes up every year, but I can confirm that two years ago SFU had a graduate student with no collegiate lacrosse experience who completed his undergraduate degree at a school with no lacrosse program. He was denied eligiblity.

Any idea what the reasoning for this decision was? Because unless there is another reason (e.g., not enough credits, gender reassignment surgery), that decision sounds asinine.

first of all...i completely agree...thats pretty rediculous.

secondly...i had a question about something that i was told, that makes no sense to me at all, but i figured i would check to make sure anyway. if a kid plays three years undergrad for a school...then stays at the school for grad, can he play. the reason i ask is that some kids on my team were told that a graduate year counts as two years of eligibility. which is rediculous to me...but then again so is the above stated rule.

[John Paul]

Grad school counting as two years would be ridiculous. You were misled. One year is one year.

Our eligibility rules are based loosely on NCAA rules, and then tweaked to allow our small, volunteer workforce to do their job regulating them. It's not a perfect system, but our number one priority is accountability. We must have rules that are enforceable, and after years of building this thing, the rules we have in place now are workable for the administration that we have in place at the team, conference and national levels.

On the surface a rule, when described in a forum like this, may look unfair. You think to yourself, "the guy didn't play before grad school, so he should be allowed to now - simple." In theory, I'd bet everyone on the national board would agree with that sentiment. In reality, when you start having to deal with legislation that must be tracked and enforced on a national level, when you're dealing with some conference administrations and many team administrations that are inconsistent and sometimes practically non-existent, you have to balance what's fair for the vast majority with what's workable. Every time a unique case comes up, the board examines not only the case, but why the rules apply. In the entire grad school issue, it's a function of administrative accountability. We may be able to add more complexity to our eligibility rules, to cover cases like this in more detail, when we finally have the budget to hire full time compliance staff. Right now we don't have a single paid or full-time person on staff, so it's a ways off.

[comatose]

What about a player coming from an NCAA team? Lets say the player only completed 2 years on that team, then sat out his final two years of undergrad. He would basically still have 2 full years of eligibility and could return to playing for an NCAA team. Would that same player be eligible to play in the MDIA for those remaining two years if he took graduate classes there (the full 12 credits)?

[onpoint]

What is the difference between these two hypothetical situations?:

1. Player plays for a year at an undergrad school (Division I, II, III or MDIA) and does not complete his undergrad degree. Player takes three years off and enrolls in another school to complete his degree. He is then eligible for another three years of MDIA play?

2. Player enrolls at undergrad school and does not play until his senior season (or even worse, he doesn't play at all). He graduates from the initial school and enrolls in another school to get graduate degree. He is now NOT eligible to compete for three more years?

I don't get the rationale if these situations are treated differently. Please correct me if I have them wrong.

[Sonny]

2. Player enrolls at undergrad school and does not play until his senior season (or even worse, he doesn't play at all). He graduates from the initial school and enrolls in another school to get graduate degree. He is now NOT eligible to compete for three more years?

Is the player in situation # 2 staying at the same school for both degrees (undergraduate and graduate)?

[Campbell]

what if a player plays three years undergrad at School A. He graduates with his undergraduate degree, then enrolls for a second undergraduate degree at School B, but is not enrolled in a graduate program. He still has one year left, can he play the last year at School B, within the MDIA?

[Sonny]

what if a player plays three years undergrad at School A. He graduates with his undergraduate degree, then enrolls for a second undergraduate degree at School B, but is not enrolled in a graduate program. He still has one year left, can he play the last year at School B, within the MDIA?

No. That question is answered by John Paul above.

[Campbell]

Maybe I am misreading John Paul's post, but wouldn't the player still be considered an undergraduate and similar to a transfer student with one year of eligibility left? I guess it boils down to how "graduate student" is defined by the MDIA. Does that mean any post graduate enrollment (undergrad or grad) or specifically enrolled in a graduate program?

[Sonny]

Maybe I am misreading John Paul's post, but wouldn't the player still be considered an undergraduate and similar to a transfer student with one year of eligibility left? I guess it boils down to how "graduate student" is defined by the MDIA. Does that mean any post graduate enrollment (undergrad or grad) or specifically enrolled in a graduate program?

Once you graduate with an undergraduate degree, I believe your MDIA eligibility is restricted to your respective school assuming you have some eligibility left AND you are enrolled in a graduate program (at the same undergraduate school) with 12 min. hours.

It's my understanding that you cannot transfer to an alternate school for a 2nd undergraduate degree (or a graduate degree) AND retain MDIA eligibility.

John Paul's post above speaks to the problems of tracking MDIA eligibility with appropriate administrative accountability. I hate to sound blunt - but lacrosse players don't have some constitutionally protected right to play lacrosse at the MDIA level. For those of you that complain about the rules being too restrictive or not being fair -- Remember that it's a privilege, not a right, to play MDIA lacrosse.

[John Paul]

Actually Sonny, he had it right. Our rules, right now, allow someone to retain eligibility at another school if they are getting a second undergraduate degree. It's a loophole that hasn't been closed yet.

Alex, I understand your point. We've been over similar scenarios, and arguments, in our board meetings. This rule is partly based on a historical fear, among some of our board members, of "ringers" from big-time varsity programs coming in for a year or two. It's also based on a belief by some board members that a main purpose of our league is to provide undergraduate athletic opportunities. Tracking grad students who attended the same school for undergrad is very easy, so despite some talk amongst some of the board to close even that loophole, it is allowed. Tracking from other schools is more difficult. There is no real difference, in a practical sense, in tracking undergrad transfers, but I don't think anyone on our board could find a way to justify disallowing undergrads with eligibility the right to play, so our eligibility people are called on to do more complex checks from time to time in those cases. They would have a lot more complex checks to make if we opened up the grad student door, as that situation happens with much more frequency.

By the way, I'm on record in our minutes, and I'll be on it here. I would prefer if we allowed grad students to play as long as they have eligibility remaining and are taking 12 credit hours, regardless of where they did their undergrad work. Try as I may, however, the MDIA is not a dictatorship. I've been on the losing side of the votes on this one every time.

[Sonny]

I stand corrected Coach Paul. My mistake.

[LaxRef]

I hate to sound blunt - but lacrosse players don't have some constitutionally protected right to play lacrosse at the MDIA level. For those of you that complain about the rules being too restrictive or not being fair -- Remember that it's a privilege, not a right, to play MDIA lacrosse.

While that's true, you could use the same argument to support banning any particular group of players: "Lacrosse players don't have some constitutionally protected right to play lacrosse at the MDIA level, therefore we're well within our rights to ban (insert ethnic or other group here) from playing MDIA lacrosse."

Just because you don't have the right to play MDIA lacrosse doesn't mean that the rules shouldn't be as fair as possible. And I understand what you're saying--the "as possible" part here is that eligibility is hard to track--but it still strikes reasonable people as unfair that a guy that never played undergrad, maybe never had an opportunity because his school had no team--had NO graduate eligibility at another school.

I hope that those in a position to do so continue to fight for a system that will seem more fair and equitable.

[comatose]

Isn't there some way for a player to petition, submit information from his institution, have his undergrad coach write to confirm, and have some board review the information so that he could be eligible to continue playing at the graduate level?