Portland State Team?

by **Phantanimal** on Wed Jun 04, 2008 3:45 pm

Does anyone know if Portland State is going to have a team next year?

Are they up for membership within the PNCLL?

**Sponsor**

by **Dr. Jason Stockton** on Thu Jun 05, 2008 4:05 pm

It is my understanding that they plan to apply for probationary status with the PNCLL, but they have not formally applied yet, and any application for membership will be voted on by the entire conference in September.

by **TheBearcatHimself** on Thu Jun 05, 2008 11:46 pm

They are applying, or planning to at least. I believe they have a very strong case after playing (and hosting as well) games against many of the current PNCLL schools this last season. If you need their contact info you can PM me.

University of Portland has also told me specifically that they are applying for league admission. However, I am less familiar with their exact situation as they have not to my knowledge played any refereed games against PNCLL schools.

by **Kyle Berggren** on Fri Jun 06, 2008 12:51 pm

I'm skeptical of both... I just fielded a call from a parent of a new PCC student (Fall of 2008). He was told he could play at Portland State while attending PCC, & obviously that isn't the case if they plan on becoming a member of the PNCLL.

If any school has a case for it, it's Portland State, but outside of that, I'm not especially sure of how we should more forwards as a conference. Every year we have teams drop out & no show for games... It's time to curb that a bit, whether it be by limiting membership, or enacting harsh penalties. I feel like these meetings become all warm & fuzzy in places, but not everyone is on the same page (I don't know exactly what that page is, my page seems to be different). Maybe we should attempt to define the purpose of the PNCLL under the MCLA. If new teams don't fit that purpose, or existing teams can't meet their obligations, they're out.

by **Dan Wishengrad** on Fri Jun 06, 2008 1:04 pm

If any school has ever been better prepared to apply for PNCLL admission it is Portland State, so in this specific case I disagree with my friend (and fellow EB member) Kyle. But I DO agree that we must stop the "revolving door" of membership and limit the PNCLL to viable, on-going programs that can sustain themselves for the indefinite future while growing stronger on and off the field.

I believe an important topic at the MCLA Summer Meetings will be to address how the MCLA should grow in the future, and how to limit this growth to programs truly deserving to be admitted. The consensus is that we have grown too big, too fast and that the weakest programs are dragging us down.

I spoke at length this Spring with student reps from Pacific University about their hopes of joining our conference. I support their efforts and offered my assistance, but also told them plainly that they are not ready to apply for membership in '08. They will need to do as PSU has done, and prove that they can compete as an independent for a year before coming to apply for membership. This holds for U. of Portland also -- they should not expect to just show up and gain admission to the PNCLL without demonstrating first the worthiness of their bid.

by **Pinball** on Fri Jun 06, 2008 1:09 pm

One thing that the UMLL does and it really helps to weed out some of the not-ready teams is a proposal and vote must be made in the spring to be admitted for the next year. Give teams a year to prepare for the season, and also helps to show what kind of a leadership a team has from year to year.

by **Jana** on Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:28 pm

The Women's league is also looking at this issue. In our case we need to define the steps to join. Need to set some benchmarks - pay dues on time 2 years in a row, tournaments only the first year, add exhibition games the 2nd, if they hit the bench marks, a full member the 3rd year.

by **Sonny** on Fri Jun 06, 2008 4:57 pm

At the risk of sounding cocky.... I could determine if they are ready in about 2-3 hours worth of work and I've never stepped foot in the great state of Oregon. (The same thing for the WDIA teams too.)

It isn't rocky science and it surely won't be determined at the last second in September at the fall PNCLL meeting.

by **TheBearcatHimself** on Fri Jun 06, 2008 5:30 pm

Kyle Berggren wrote:I'm skeptical of both... I just fielded a call from a parent of a new PCC student (Fall of 2008). He was told he could play at Portland State while attending PCC, & obviously that isn't the case if they plan on becoming a member of the PNCLL.

If any school has a case for it, it's Portland State, but outside of that, I'm not especially sure of how we should more forwards as a conference. Every year we have teams drop out & no show for games... It's time to curb that a bit, whether it be by limiting membership, or enacting harsh penalties. I feel like these meetings become all warm & fuzzy in places, but not everyone is on the same page (I don't know exactly what that page is, my page seems to be different). Maybe we should attempt to define the purpose of the PNCLL under the MCLA. If new teams don't fit that purpose, or existing teams can't meet their obligations, they're out.

Kyle I totally understand your concerns, and I basically agree with you. I don't want to make it sound like I would be supporting both these teams haphazardly just to fill in for Lewis and Clark. From what my two eyes saw, Portland State was a team that was at or above the level of commitment that Lewis and Clark had last season. Now they had some rough edges to clean up, one would think that they would be closer to joining in the Fall, assuming they are aware of the necessary steps to be taken.

As for U of Portland, I was somewhat taken aback when they told me in April they planned on applying for admission this coming Fall. I had not heard of them playing any refereed games, and they did not look developed or understanding of the requirements of PNCLL membership from my discussions with them. We will see though. I have sent both teams' leaders information about our league, this forum for discussion, and contact info for EB members. I have not heard that they have used this to become more familiar with the league, though I would hope they have been in contact with EB members.

by **buffalowill** on Fri Jun 06, 2008 9:18 pm

University of Portland would almost complete the West Coast Conference in terms of MCLA teams. The remaining school would be the University of San Francisco. I always thought it very odd that USF didn't have a team...anyone know why?
Anyways, any thoughts on a WCC school going varsity? ...D I...no big time football...private...would be a great fit methinks.

by **Forty Two** on Sat Jun 07, 2008 9:52 am

One thing that USF would have going for them is a classic little stadium set right in the heart of the campus. It is the field the soccer team plays on - we had the NCJLA Nor Cal championships there last season. A perfect venue for lacrosse (although it is turf).

With the amount of players coming up through Nor Cal high schools, the other school that should have a lacrosse program is SF State. Huge enrollment, great location.

by **Steno** on Sat Jun 07, 2008 7:09 pm

It's a commuter school, so that could hurt it.

by **Mark Brown** on Sun Jun 08, 2008 9:20 pm

If Portland St. is to join the PNCLL I believe that it should be in the D1. They are the largest school in Oregon and Portland is the hotbed for lax in the state. If D2 is not a developmental league then why admit a team w/ 26,000 students to D2?
I hope the RMLC reads this and moves UVSC up to D1 where they belong w/ 26,000 students.
It's absurd to have schools that big competing w/ small schools. I know you can reference Sonoma and other smaller schools that compete very well in the D1 but that doesn't make it the rule or the norm.
As of now the MCLA is leaving it up to each League to decide where the teams should play, minus the D1 football rule, and based on what I heard at the MCLA BOD meeting last Dec they have no intention of changing this.
This means that each league needs to be honest and decide what is reasonable and BEST for their respective leagues.

by **Timbalaned** on Mon Jun 09, 2008 12:31 am

I will say though that PSU is kind of a commuter school, from what I am led to believe. I don't know if a lot of those kids are there on campus and stuff all the time, so the 26,000 might be a little misleading, or I could be totally wrong, but just something to think about.

by **PNWLaxer** on Mon Jun 09, 2008 2:40 pm

I am not a fan of putting 'new' teams in Div I straight away for a number of reasons.

Regardless of how many students a school lists as full time undergrads, that in no way translates into the number of lacrosse players that attend the school itself.

New teams are most likely not going to dominate the Div II division, exception is Westminster, and will allow for the team to establish a solid foundation for years to come in the form of greater #'s, coaching stability, school support and funds.

New teams are generally short on numbers and the league should place the team where they are going to be somewhat competitive with the majority of the teams, maybe not win but not get shut out 20 or 30 to zero, it will play to allow for growth.

The PNCLL has allowed far too many teams in the recent paste to 1) enter the league without the necessary long term plans and 2) to drop out half way through the year because they can not sustain a budget or players to fulfill their commitments. It may be time to say "lets concentrate on the teams we have currently and make sure they are all on the right footing" instead of saying "the more the merrier".