Given this gentleman's jealousy and frustration that his UCI Eaters have never won a D1 conference title, he has taken to distributing garbage intentionally.
For the record, his dislike of LB includes a lot of false info.
1) LB has never recruited or signed any player over 20 years of age
2) Malenovska is 20... just turned 20 thirty days ago. She will be 20 duringher entire frosh regular season.
3) She is the first 20 year old signed (well, she was 19 when signed and announced) by LB... but Cal's Juricova was a 21 year old true frosh.
Why the pettiness: LB has beat UCI 12 of the last 13 meetings (fact)... including the 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008 and 2009 league finals (fact). Some of those years, UCI has had much more talent.... but Gouci does not spin that. Now that is his real motivation for providing many of you his false info. Though I realize 99% of you could give a hoot about lowly Big West Conference tennis.
Given that UC Irvine is a math and science school, it appears Gouci may have failed to graduate.
I post this as several susequent posts were negative using Gouci's intentionally false information. Also known as underhandsmash on the LB site where goes to incite havoc, perhaps he should go spend more time elsewhere rather than be the LIAR that he is.
I hope all that have been sucked into his mess have a great summer. Just felt the need to correct his LIE since a couple made follow up comments.
Off to enjoy the French Open! :bounce:
May 25th, 2009, 06:50 PM
Her birthday is in April so when the 2010 NCAA singles tourney is played in May Long Beach St.'s Klaudia Malenovska will be a 21 year old freshman!
Dude, you are clutching for anything to feel good about. Do you want to borrow some of our polish to use on your trophy case? :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
20 year old freshman well within the NCAA age rule.... deal with it and stop attempting to bad math a program succeeding with minimal funding and kicking your ***. :devil:
However, how old will she be i if she does not play in May? :confused:
Congrats on your Eater degree. Save your response though... I have posted you as an IGNORE... not time of Go Univ. of California @ Ignorance .... You win though... Done amusing you. :wavey:
May 25th, 2009, 10:53 PM
... I have posted you as an IGNORE... not time of Go Univ. of California @ Ignorance .... You win though... Done amusing you. :wavey:
ROFLMAO :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha:
Form my buddy, this is one of the biggest laughs you have given me yet. I placed it in quotes to preserve it. You know in case you delete the post like the one where you thought Allie Will was becoming an Arizona St. Sun Devil. :haha:
Form the main reason YOU come to this board is for the recruiting updates. You won't be able to see any of my recruiting posts if you have me on your ignore list.
:haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha:
May 27th, 2009, 09:08 PM
The NCAA allows 20 year old freshmen. The NCAA's interpretation of amateur is also different in tennis than in some other sports. Anyone that knows anything about tennis knows that $25,000 in career earnings is nothing. Even in one year it's nothing - not even close to covering the expenses that it took to earn the $25k.
If a coach doesn't recruit RIGHT UP TO the line that the NCAA draws between amateur and pro and between just young enough and too old, then they are not doing their job! I'm not sure exactly where I stand on the age issue and the amateur issue. I do know that Europe is not like the U.S. and that playing money tournaments and club tennis are just the facts of life for those that want to try and make a run at playing tennis as a career. I certainly don't think that someone that made $25k in 2-3 years of playing pro tennis should be eliminated from consideration to play college tennis but I think that top-200 like the girl at Pacific this year is a bit much (even if she has fallen off considerably since her peak). If the NCAA all of the sudden allowed baseball players who had played up until the AA level to come back to college before age 21, I guarantee you that most every coach in the country would be after them. It's not about whether that rule would be right or wrong, its about those coaches trying to do their job, have the best team possible, and being able to keep their jobs (which by the way are their livelihoods and when its about your livelihood and supporting your family, the spirit of fair play goes out the window - this is not YMCA Sunday league - whatever it takes, within the rules, is what I do personally in my line of work and I would be shortchanging my company and family if I did any less).
Anyhow, my point is: Gouci, you shouldn't hate the coaches for trying to do their job (and it seems like you are hating those that are doing their jobs the best). I don't know many schools in the country that would turn down the girls that Long Beach is bringing in next year. If you think that what they and Cal and others are doing is "not the right way" you certainly have a right to that opinion but bashing them doesn't make them more wrong or you more right - it just makes you look like a jerk...and thinly-veiled negativity just makes you look like a thinly-veiled jerk.
I agree with you on many points you have made on these forums and disagree with you on others but the bottom line is that I respect coaches' rights to do their jobs and to recruit as vigorously as the NCAA rules will allow them to.
May 28th, 2009, 01:00 AM
10sE after reading your post it seems my thinking is in alignment with your thinking for the first two paragraphs. The travel expenses for a touring pro playing a full schedule is around $50k per year and double that if you take your coach along. Winning only 25k puts your family in debt.
Anyhow, my point is: Gouci, you shouldn't hate the coaches for trying to do their job (and it seems like you are hating those that are doing their jobs the best).
I would advise you 10sE not to be quick to make assumptions because you have made some wrong assumptions about me. I don't recall stating I hated any coach because that's not the case. I don't happen to hate any college tennis coach.
Now when Form makes wrong assumptions about me like when he thinks I'm a jealous and frustrated person, just because I don't take the time to refute him it doesn't make what he's saying any more true.
If you read some of the other posts you'll see the person who really hates the 21 year old freshmen and the coaches who signed them is Form.
In my humble opinion Form is being petty by misplacing his hate towards individual players and coaches instead of placing it on the NCAA that cleared them to play.
If a player turns 21 two months before the end of her freshmen year in my book I consider her a 21 year old freshman period. Form is really ignoring me because he doesn't like to read me make the argument that the Long Beach St. player is in the same 21 year old freshmen group that the players from Pacific and Cal are in, players that Form hates with a passion. :lol: