N. Colorado's final consolation game is kaput

[univduke21]

Team of 26 players, 2 coaches, 2 managers = 30 people

CU- 45+ team member, 4 to 5 coaches, 3 to 4 managers.

A but more people than you take into consideration.

[BB]

are you there to win a championship, or play some meaningless consolation games? Lighten up and take it easy. The consolation games don't mean anything, and are for fun!!!! It's too bad it was your team, but at least you got to play. The last game of the 07 season was when you lost. Everything else is off season ball for fun.

[warri0rlax22]

sonny i do not want you to get the wrong impression. The national tournament this year was awesome. great venue, great games, great staff.
The only thing that pissed me off was the guy coming on here saying we got embarassed. With our consolation game with harding last year haunting us for the entire season I didnt want to go through another year of it. Sorry if i seemed to attack the admin of the tourney, that was not my intentions. I just want to have the chance to be at the national tourney next year, and make another run at a title.

[byualum]

sonny i do not want you to get the wrong impression.

Too late.

[rtbirm]

The entire "b" division got the shaft because UC Irvine left early? Wow that is quite a statement. I play for UC Irvine and many of us HAD to go back for exams. Yes I have read all of the arguments condeming us, but the bottom line is, our school did not care that we were in the national tournament. We are a CLUB team at Irvine and are given ZERO slack from administration. Several of our professors were not willing to write new exams or set up alternate lab times for us.

Despite all of that however, if we would have beat Dayton in our fist game, most of us would have missed our exams and failed our classes to compete for the national title. We easily put in more time than most teams in our division (2.5 hours of practice 5 days a week, 3 weeks of double days) to win the title and were extremely disappointed we had to leave early. And not every team was in school like has been stated, Dayton told us they had been done for over a week.

I think many of you are making way to big a deal about us leaving our 2nd consolation game. We had too, thats awesome that Oregon lets students leave for five weeks or you can miss finals at other schools. UCI however does not have that policy.

Sonny, where did you hear that rumor that we did not want to be there? Those of us who were there would have played with 11 guys. If you are going to make a claim like that, you should probably cite your source next time.

We dedicated our entire school year to lacrosse. We had no idea going back early was going to create this firestorm among some of the people in this forum, but they were for legitimate reasons. I don't see why the "b" tournament can't be held later in the week to be more accommodating to schools like ours.

You guys can dissect this all you want. I am sure I will receive more fire than I intended. I just feel that I have to stick up for our decision before I read anymore assumptions people make about UC Irvine's dedication or commitment to the game of lacrosse and the MDIA.

[wapiti]

This is unbelievable. I can't believe you are trying to justify picking up your marbles and going home in the middle of a tournement. When you make a committment it needs to be honored.

You know I can almost ( well maybe not ) give Calvin some credit for stepping up early, notifying the MCLA and having them get a team that wanted to be there.

By all accounts Southwestern acquitted themselves well, they played hard and were a class act throughout the whole tourney.

You guys were there, and chose to leave, causing this whole discussion and issues to arise. All you had to do was stay one more day, like everyone else committed to do.

Maybe you should have demonstrated effort and dedication you say you had throughout the season through the end of the year.....

[destroyer10]

It is definitely an interesting and unconventional move that UC Irvine made deciding to leave the tournament early, but their claim is legit. I have always been told that school comes first, but I know thats just me.
Why should a team of student-athletes put their educations and their futures on the line for the chance to play another game that has no bearing on the season whatsoever? That seems pretty ridiculous in my opinion. Apparently someone was going to get screwed, as our webmaster so eloquently puts it. If not "the entire 'b' division" then 18 guys jeopardizing their futures to play a few consolation games.

All of you need to realise that there is a reason it is called "virtual varsity". To assume that there is a common agreement among universities and the way they approach their respective lacrosse programs is erroneous and foolish. It is simply a generalization, and those must always be avoided.

I don't think Irvine should have forfeited their bid and I'm glad for their sake they didn't. They won the WCLL; they earned their spot. That team traveled halfway across the country as the number 12 seed playing number 5. Hope for the best, but expect the worst guys. Essentially they traveled all the way out there to lose. To me that says a ton more about their character than sticking around to please a bunch of people who have regrets about their season.

This is unbelievable. I can't believe you are trying to justify picking up your marbles and going home in the middle of a tournement. When you make a committment it needs to be honored.

Wapiti, this quote is a good one. What would you call higher education Wapiti? It sounds a lot like: I can't believe you all are missing something that is unimportant for something that is important. Some people go to elite universities that are hard to get into and cost a lot of money. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt Wapiti that what you posted was out of frustration because it really doesn't make any sense.

You guys are absolutely killing me.

UNC (& the entire B Division) got screwed by Irvine.

Sonny, how can YOU of all people make a statement like this? Arguably UNC got the handle, ARGUABLY. It is a bummer that UNC had to play a pick-up game. It sucks for them. Would UNC have really gotten a better game had Irvine stayed? To say yes is a joke because nobody will ever know. After reading some posts made by UNC players it seems that they are more upset at the unsportsmanlike behavior of their LSA opponents than playing a pickup game. Whatever happened to Southern hospitality?
But the "entire DIV B"? Thats taking it a little too far. As far as I'm concerned UC Irvine players were put in a compromising position by the league. Made to choose between school and lacrosse, they chose both.
So why all this hubbub over students choosing to fulfill their educational obligations rather than participate in games which don't matter? It could be that people are upset a bunch of guys from California pointed out to everyone else that there may be a flaw in the system. Until there is a better way to do it, I think we should all just respect the decisions that teams make and encourage them to do it differently next time if we disagree.

[Hi-Line Lax]

Irvine could definitely be screwing the entire B division, along with Calvin and Salem St. and I can't say I would blame the board for having serious discussions about removing the B National Tournament altogether (although I hope that doesn't happen).

Anybody defending Irvine (including their own players) needs to take a step back and remember their commitment to this league... which I don't think they should be able to compete in next year... and not just to their university and higher education. Just apologize and accept your punishment, stop trying to make excuses.

[Beta]

As far as I'm concerned UC Irvine players were put in a compromising position by the league.

The league set everything up and they chose to participate in their conference playoffs and then go to nationals. They put themselves in that position. No one forced them to be in the league.

So why all this hubbub over students choosing to fulfill their educational obligations rather than participate in games which don't matter? It could be that people are upset a bunch of guys from California pointed out to everyone else that there may be a flaw in the system.

The people that play sports in college are the people that are the best at sports AND getting their education. That's the kicker. While it is "student-athlete" with the "student" being first...you have to follow up on that second half (athlete), as well. How many guys are fantastic athletes in high school then mess up in college because they're irresponsible? A lot. Im sorry, but if you can't plan ahead in college for your athletics as well as your education..you're in for a rude awakening in the real world once you graduate when the stakes are a tad higher.

[LaxTV_Admin]

It is definitely an interesting and unconventional move that UC Irvine made deciding to leave the tournament early, but their claim is legit. I have always been told that school comes first, but I know thats just me.
Why should a team of student-athletes put their educations and their futures on the line for the chance to play another game that has no bearing on the season whatsoever? That seems pretty ridiculous in my opinion. Apparently someone was going to get screwed, as our webmaster so eloquently puts it. If not "the entire 'b' division" then 18 guys jeopardizing their futures to play a few consolation games.

If this is such an issue that players have the problems you are referring to then how come this does not happen in the 'A' division.

Teams have to honor their commitments to the league, period. School is absolutely important, but I cannot think of a university in which you advised them of the situation at the beginning of the year and then told them you made the national tournament that would not back their team. Maybe I am naive, but I think it is a lame excuse for not honoring a commitment.

I concur with Beta on this, you have to follow up on the Athlete part...

[destroyer10]

The league set everything up and they chose to participate in their conference playoffs and then go to nationals. They put themselves in that position. No one forced them to be in the league.

Absolutely true. However, what was Calvin's (and their league) punishment for them forfeiting their AQ? I believe their whole league lost an AQ next year. What it seems like you are saying is that instead of a team missing one consolation game they should forfeit their bid, thereby eliminating anyone from their conference getting an AQ next year? Those are the rules. Maybe they should be changed but those are the rules.

The people that play sports in college are the people that are the best at sports AND getting their education. That's the kicker. While it is "student-athlete" with the "student" being first...you have to follow up on that second half (athlete), as well.

There is a reason the "student" comes first in "student-athlete". What I'm wondering is why this team is being criticized for being students first? The cost-benefit analysis of the situation doesn't weigh in favor of sticking around for a consolation game.

Im sorry, but if you can't plan ahead in college for your athletics as well as your education..you're in for a rude awakening in the real world once you graduate when the stakes are a tad higher.

I stick to my earlier claim that some schools are more accommodating to their programs than others. I agree they should plan ahead. But then wouldn't they plan ahead every year if they are truly competitive? If this is the case then the school should already be aware of the competitive nature of the team. The fact that the club is still not backed by the school is a case in point.

destroyer10 wrote:
It is definitely an interesting and unconventional move that UC Irvine made deciding to leave the tournament early, but their claim is legit. I have always been told that school comes first, but I know thats just me.
Why should a team of student-athletes put their educations and their futures on the line for the chance to play another game that has no bearing on the season whatsoever? That seems pretty ridiculous in my opinion. Apparently someone was going to get screwed, as our webmaster so eloquently puts it. If not "the entire 'b' division" then 18 guys jeopardizing their futures to play a few consolation games.


If this is such an issue that players have the problems you are referring to then how come this does not happen in the 'A' division.

My guess is, like I said before, some schools are more accommodating. I don't understand why it needs to be more complicated than that. Along those same lines, I can see how a school in Div A would be more likely to garner support from their school seeing as how Div A is a little more prestigious. Other than that, I don't have an answer for you.

Teams have to honor their commitments to the league, period. School is absolutely important, but I cannot think of a university in which you advised them of the situation at the beginning of the year and then told them you made the national tournament that would not back their team.

Clearly, there is at least one. How many teams know at the beginning of the year they are going to go to nationals? Despite the foresight of success, teams should notify the school? Every year? If this is the case, as I have already pointed out, the school would already be aware of the intentions and potential of the team. Whose to say that didn't happen with UC Irvine? You are all assuming that the program not only didn't want support from the school, but didn't need it. I think the fact that they came and left speaks loud enough for their true wishes.


Are there any other universities out there which do not support their programs unconditionally?

[CATLAX MAN]

There is a reason the "student" comes first in "student-athlete". What I'm wondering is why this team is being criticized for being students first?

What is so hard to understand? They are being criticized because they made a commitment when they joined the league and accepted the bid to the tournament to fulfill their end of the bargain. They chose the self-serving, selfish route and bailed on their commitments. Just try and do that in the business world (bail on your commitments) and see how fast you are fired/out of business. It's a case of living up to your word.

The cost-benefit analysis of the situation doesn't weigh in favor of sticking around for a consolation game.

This excuse is just a steaming pile of doo-doo. Perhaps they didn't consider the cost/benefit of the other teams affected here. Maybe next time they should offer to pick up the tab for the other teams' expenses who got left holding the bag.

[destroyer10]

What is so hard to understand? They are being criticized because they made a commitment when they joined the league and accepted the bid to the tournament to fulfill their end of the bargain. They chose the self-serving, selfish route and bailed on their commitments. Just try and do that in the business world (bail on your commitments) and see how fast you are fired/out of business. It's a case of living up to your word.

I agree that it is extremely selfish of them to take their exams. They shoulda bit the bullet, forfeited thousands of dollars, to stay and play a meaningless game. They have some nerve!

This excuse is just a steaming pile of doo-doo. Perhaps they didn't consider the cost/benefit of the other teams affected here. Maybe next time they should offer to pick up the tab for the other teams' expenses who got left holding the bag.

The way I see it they paid to be out there too. If anything, they got less bang for their buck. Which to me says that they wanted to be there but were unable to stay. It appears as if they did the best they could.

So what happens when a team is in a situation like this? It appears that you all only give two options, A and B.
(A) The team in question travels to nationals and plays every game regardless of the level of support from their school, missing exams and losing money if necessary.
(B) If they decide to not go, they forfeit their bid, which their LEAGUE is penalized for.

After looking at the situation like this it's amazing to me that this hasn't happened before.

[shep]

I don't think Irvine should have forfeited their bid and I'm glad for their sake they didn't. They won the WCLL; they earned their spot. That team traveled halfway across the country as the number 12 seed playing number 5. Hope for the best, but expect the worst guys. Essentially they traveled all the way out there to lose. To me that says a ton more about their character than sticking around to please a bunch of people who have regrets about their season.

So the lower seed should always expect to lose to the higher seed and plan their tourney experience accordingly?! Glad Northeastern (#13 over #4 UM) didn't get that memo.

That's the most ridiculous assertion I've read in a while.

[destroyer10]

So the lower seed should always expect to lose to the higher seed and plan their tourney experience accordingly?! Glad Northeastern (#13 over #4 UM) didn't get that memo.

Right, thats what I said. The lower seed is always going to lose. Alas, another generalisation.
Irvine didn't even travel with their whole team. From what I heard some of the guys were puking on the sidelines from their low numbers. I would have to assume, if thats true, that they tried to win. I think they were just being honest with themselves that victory may not be inevitable.