LaxTV Forums | A Forum About The MCLA

If the Tournament Started today, barring no upsets, #8 SCAD, #9 Elon, #10 UNC-Charlotte and #11 Montana State would all be missing out due to lack of OOC games. A third of the tournament teams would not be eligible. Is this worse than normal? I know from year to year a #10 or #11 seed might not be eligible but #8 through #11 seems like alot. Thoughts?

Don't get me wrong, I am a huge believer in OOC games. I think it makes for a better team, conference and league when teams step out and play top talent schools from around the country. I also think it really enriches the MCLA experience for the players.

However, I think there are a few teams that don't play a lot of OOC games because it is a lot to plan and expensive (again, I still think it's worth it). You can argue all you want that it is safety net to secure an AQ, but I think a lot of teams feel that if they don't win their conference, then maybe they don't belong at nationals. I would disagree with that, but again, it's not my team.

I think all the below teams could have a shot at winning their conference. When I look at the SELC, there are about 4 teams that based on limited games appear to be worthy of an AQ/National Tourney birth, but unless my information is dated, if they do not all have the required number of OOC games, then only one of them is going.

Can someone direct me to the rules on this, please?

The rule is simple. In order to be eligibile for an at large bid, an MCLA D-2 team must have competed in no fewer than 2 games against different MCLA D-2 teams from outside their conference.

so would it be safe to say that these teams are just assuming they will win their division, receive the automatic bid and not bother scheduling anymore games?

and if this is the case is it the right thing to do by scheduling less games and minimizing risk of injury in "unimportant non-conference games"

I guess that depends on what division a team plays. In the UMLL D2, UST & SJU are perennial Top 5 teams and have both appeared in Dallas the past two seasons. Two years ago UST won the League Bid, last season SJU took the play-offs. It behooves each program to load up on OOC games not only to insure eligibility if they fall short come league tourney time but also make sure they build a strong game resume during the regular season so that the pollsters do not look them over come that final Poll vote.

On the other hand, if you compete in a league where there is one power house team and no one else is really within reach to knock them off, you might be able to make the argument that no OOC games are necessary. But, you then run the risk of getting picked off in your league play-offs and missing the whole dance all together.

Besides the obvious set back of the financial burden of early OOC games (travel and Domes) or the possible scheduling difficulties of later season OOC games, I see no negatives to playing as many OOC games as one could possibly schedule/ afford.

There is one other major drawback I can think of to just planning on winning your conf. bid. The next step after that is getting all the way to Dallas to realize that you've only played teams in your conference and have no idea what the style of play is elsewhere. Take for instance (total speculation, lot's of lax to play) a UPS vs. Emory game in Dallas. I'm willing to bet their are some serious differences in the style of play. Also, if you come from a weaker conf. and then go to Dallas you may find yourself in the thick of adversity for the first time - not a good place to be testing the waters!

I'm not saying Emory or UPS would have an advantage in that match up based on whether or not they had played a certian number of OOC games, but I think you learn about your squad and lacrosse in general when you travel outside of your region to play.

When I was playing & coaching I always believed my team benefitted from their their OOC scheduling. Over the past 2 1/2 years they have played teams from the WCLL, GRLC, UMLL, SELC & CLLA. I highly doubt that has had a negative effect on their growth as a team.

montana state will have fulfilled its ooc requirement by the end of the season...

despite getting cancelled on by both western washington as well as college of idaho (both games were set to be in bozeman), we are making an extra trip to spokane the weekend of april 5th to get in some ooc games.

USTLAX06 wrote:I'm not saying Emory or UPS would have an advantage in that match up based on whether or not they had played a certian number of OOC games, but I think you learn about your squad and lacrosse in general when you travel outside of your region to play.

As the UPS Coach, I will say the team with more games against quality opponents will have an advantage. If we do in fact win the PNCLL, it will be nearly all of my players first games against non-PNCLL teams.... That's a disadvantage in my book, but my team has been willing to work toward solving that problem. More importantly, teams like UST & SJU have players with 4 years of experience in these big games... That's the true advantage you're looking for.

I think that much of this is due to simple geography and in turn money. The growth of the SELC has been great but at the same time it has swallowed up every team in the Southeast leaving the closest OOC teams in Ohio, Pennsylvania, or west of the Mississippi.
I completely agree with the OOC requirement but at the same time feel there could be a second way of getting an at large bid. For example, in lieu of 2 OOC games a team must play a minimum of 12 (an arbitrary number for examples sake) games and be ranked in the top 10.
In the long run the OOC requirement is a far better way of getting the best teams to the tournament but if the top teams continue to be shut out alternatives should be considered.

The problem with not playing OOC games is that it is very tough to rank teams when you cannot compare scores between conferences. The RMLC is a prime example of that this year with lack of OOC games. Although poll voters and myself feel that they are strong it is really tough to know for sure without most of the teams playing OOC games.
Low budgets and lack of time to schedule these games is a poor excuse for not playing them in my opinion.

Despite the fact that a few really good teams in the PNCLL are not playing OOC games, I think the requirement of 2 OOC games is more than fair. Yes, for many conferences this may be a larger burden than it is for others - but there is just no way we can have a meaningful D2 top-25 without interconference battles.

I agree with Kyle that any team that wins the PNCLL (with the exception of Western Oregon) will be at a severe disadvantage in Texas having not played outside the Northwest. Some other teams in the PNCLL played OOC games this season - but the 3 of the 4 frontrunners for the final four this season in UPS, WWU and CWU - none of these teams are playing OOC games.

Kudos to Western Oregon for making this trip down to Southern California to play 3 OOC games. Irvine dropped them at the last minute, so they added Claremont to their trip. WOU is also working to see if they can replace WWU or College of Idaho on Montana State's schedule.

On another note, I feel terrible for team like Montana State that had 2 OOC games scheduled and now finds themselves scrambling to get those 2 OOC games in. Cancelling trips at the last minute is totallly unacceptable and we are working hard to help MSU get the 2 OOC games they'll need to qualify for an at-large bid.

think that much of this is due to simple geography and in turn money. The growth of the SELC has been great but at the same time it has swallowed up every team in the Southeast leaving the closest OOC teams in Ohio, Pennsylvania, or west of the Mississippi.

I'm not sure I get your point. Which teams were shut out or are being shut out of the tournament and how?

There's also the idea that if a team can demonstrate the ability to play games that require significant travel, they're more likely going to be able to plan and fundraise sufficiently to accept an at-large bid.

All conferences should require all teams to play the minimum number of OOC games required for a bid to nationals next year so we can stop having this discussion... it's one of the biggest things holding Div 2 back.