Games for 2/23 - 3/1: Predict, discuss, report scores here

[onpoint]

Not a bad showing by the Cougs, but they had best come out firing tomorrow against ASU. I don't predict they will have any trouble, but they need a win heading into next weekend's big TAMU/Michigan doubleheader to gain some momentum.

[the lax]

I'm more curious to why UNC scored three goals in the first quarter than to what they were chanting.

Obviously the Rams were looking ahead to CSU. Do you blame them? Who cares that they only scored 22 and gave up 5!

Also, BYU needs all the help they can get against Michigan.

[onpoint]

Weather for Colorado Springs today: about 48 and sunny around game time with mild winds. Should be a perfect day to play lacrosse, maybe a little bit chilly in the stands. Game is on field turf at CC's Washburn Field.

[the lax]

Who won??

[Andy Sharp]

Colorado State 14
Colorado College 11

Reported direct from Flip.

[JRA]

Any update on BYU VS ASU?

[TrainerDan]

BYU 21
ASU 6

[onpoint]

14-11 CSU wins pretty convincingly. Was up 14-7 at one point before allowing some easy man-up and garbage goals to end the game. Overall, I would say that CC is down from last year, but it was their first game too. CSU's attack out-manned the CC defense and buried a lot of shots from in close, not giving the goalie much chance. The vibe around CSU lacrosse is very good; good energy, lots of passes and teamwork, hard working. The attack is as strong as it has been as a unit in several years and the midfield is also pretty potent. I will say that the defense needs to step it up a notch or two, but Kellen Bershinsky, Ryan Price and Adam Schnirel are a solid trio that really laid some hits today. CSU's short stick d middies were very solid as well, containing a pretty good bunch of CC midfielders. Today's game lacked some of the emotion of last year's victory for the Rams, but there is still some definite animosity towards CSU from the CC side. Many of CC's goals were nearly saved by Pete Jokisch and trickled into the net, but there were two I know he wants back that even he might call "softies." CC has good shooters, but only scored four or five of their goals against the set D. A lot of junk off the ground or in an unsettled situation. CSU's ride was good all day. I have to say I was a little disappointed in CC's overall skill level, though they did play hard until the very end. Play of the game was a man-up behind the back bouncer to the top corner by Shay Cunningham from Nick Stanitz-Harper that completely shut the crowd up. CSU's man up was a solid 3/4 if my math is correct. That's about it. I expect both teams to improve, but it was a good win (only the third in history that I researched) for CSU against Flip's alma matter.

[CSUalum32]

yeah alex, the team looked good and yes it is a good feeling to beat CC. I think the team as a whole looked strong in their first real test of the season. i was kind of shocked as well with CC play as well. they did not look like they have in the past. i must say flip is doing a great job this year, the team looks strong despite the limited practice time.

[mcneito]

UVSC 19 Wyoming 1. UVSC Defense looked great only allowing 6 shots the whole afternoon. Offense had good moments, but still needs work. Overall good first game forUV. It should be fun to hear how they do up in Boise in a week and a half.

[the lax]

Concern over Colorado College's loss to CSU from laxpower's forum:

I have seen in several places that Colorado College was thought to be a possible at large bid in the D3 tournament, thus a fairly well respected D3 program. Knowing how well respected Colorado St. is as an MDIA team, is this considered a blow towards middle of the road division 3 lacrosse, showing that dedicated club teams are more than capable of beating them? Sure, top D3 teams like Salisbury and Nazareth would not lose to Colorado St, but aside from the top tier of D3, are the top MDIA teams better than most other D3 teams? by creasemonkey30

To Alex Smith and others that were there: Is CSU that good or CC that bad?

[Laxman50]

I would say thee top 7 or 8 MDIA teams would do well at the D3 level but after that I would think there would be a long drop off. Most MDIA teams would have a hard time playing even poor D3 teams. Lets look at Wittenberg and Wooster and Kenyon. They have all played good MDIA teams. Wooster is a very good team but still out of the top 25 and played Michigan to a 1 or 2 goal game last year. Kenyon is sliding fast and also played Michigan to a one goal game. Wittenberg is a mid to low level D3 team and lost to Michigan by 8 and beat Mizzu by 3 this year. Now I am not saying MDIA is bad and I do think the top teams would do well. But there is a large drop off past the top teams and top coaches in league. Also an at large bid to the NCAA's dose not say that a team is in the top 16. Last year Wooster went and I do not think they were rated in the top 16 at the end of the year, correct me if I am wrong. I would also like to point out that NCAA rules make it tuff on some D3 teams. Many of the top MDIA schools are at D1 schools that have no such rules and trust me it dose make a huge difference and yes the top schools like CSU do allot of work to get kids to there schools that D3 or even D1 coaches could not do. I AM NOT MDIA BASHING JUST POINTING THINGS OUT!!!!! Also if some of my numbers are a little off on scores up top sorry in advance but I think they are close.

[the lax]

I would agree that MDIA's playoff system is much better of producing top teams for the tournament rather than D3's system which is based on top teams in the region i.e. Wooster getting a bid because they were the top team in Pool C along with Whittier and Tufts not being able to go because the NESCAC only allows one team to go to the tournament.

This topic of who is better will probably be debated for a long time to come. The UCSB v. Whittier game would have been a better measuring stick. #1 club team versus a ranked D3 team rather than the #2 club versus an "up and coming" D3 team.

[Bluevelvet]

I would also like to point out that NCAA rules make it tuff on some D3 teams. Many of the top MDIA schools are at D1 schools that have no such rules and trust me it dose make a huge difference and yes the top schools like CSU do allot of work to get kids to there schools that D3 or even D1 coaches could not do.

What does this mean? Really.

[onpoint]

To Alex Smith and others that were there: Is CSU that good or CC that bad?

CSU is that much better than CC. It has nothing to do with who is in what division. That argument is beginning to become tiresome. Plain and simple, CSU outclassed CC in all walks of the game yesterday, from organization to skill to execution. Has nothing to do with who is from where or playing in which division.