Portland State Team?

[woulaxfan]

Assuming PSU goes DI, is it not a possibility for them to schedule some games with DII teams if they feel there is better competition? This seems to me to be a win/win situation as they would still be a DI team and "playing down" for closer competition will help them grow in skill and maybe be less frustrated with being blown out by the DI teams.

Dan up in UW told me that even though it is comprised of club teams, the league still strives for varsity type standards. To me, this would include making sure you have a committed group of players that are willing to take their beatings and still come out and work on their short comings. This is one of Pacific University's potential short comings and something we will be working on diligently.

I do understand though its one thing to tell your team "we are going to get beat A LOT" and for them to say they understand. Its another thing when they start tasting defeat and they change their minds about playing. Somehow Willamette either got lucky or did a good job keeping players interested through the years. Their multiple game win streak this year makes them a perfect example that a team can get beat on a lot and still survive and grow. Hopefully the PSU players can find a way to learn from Willamette's (and other teams') determination.

[Dan Wishengrad]

Idaho was admitted to the PNCLL in '05 as a DI team, as the Vandals have a DI football program and are as such defined as belonging in the MCLA upper division. UI went three + seasons without ever winning a PNCLL conference game, and there were many lopsided defeats at the hands of the DI powers. But the Vandals hung together and by the Spring of '08 had emerged as a legit DI team. As I wrote in another thread earlier, I sat and watched Idaho play an elite MCLA powerhouse (SFU) extremely tough in April, losing 14-7 in a game which was far closer than that final score indicates. Then the next day they battled the Huskies evenly for the first half before we put them away in the second half for a "must win" that sent us to playoffs. It took some of our best lacrosse of the year to win that game, and Idaho had me really scared with their inspired play. They have obviously become a team to be reckoned with in the future.

My point is that it took this "tough love" of forcing UI to play in DI to spur the Vandals into the rapid improvement shown. I'm sure those first three years weren't a barrel of laughs for the Vandals' players. Nobody enjoys getting blown out. Ask Wazzou if they had much fun in '08, their first year back in the PNCLL (and the upper division). It was tough not to feel sorry for the Cougs this season, but no way was the PNCLL going to allow them to play in the small college division just to soothe some potentially bruised egos and offer some "easier" competition. WSU still needs a real coach and will have to find a way to double their roster, but if they can do that then they really do belong and should improve and become competitive quickly.

Portland State has some enormous advantages that Idaho and Washington State do not, namely existence in the largest city in a state which has a booming high school lacrosse program which should continuously feed PSU experienced players, year after year. They should be able to recruit and hire an experienced, capable coaching staff. They are, by any reasonable measure, a DI team -- regardless of the absence of a D-I football program. Membership in the PNCLL is not an inalienable right, it is a privilege. IF PSU is truly ready to apply for admission (as I have stated I believe they certainly are) to our conference, then it must be to the division that they permanently belong in. But yes, they can schedule some additional games or scrimmages (without paying for refs that is, Coach Patton) against teams from the PNCLL's DII. There will surely be quite a few open weekends during the season when conference games are not scheduled.

Just my two cents...

[Tim Whitehead]

So just so I have this straight, what a lot of you are saying is that even though Portland State isn't a DI football school, which is the criteria the MCLA has for defining DI schools, you want to make them play DI MCLA lacrosse? The "tough love" you want the league to give them can be just as tough in DII as it is in DI. I think they should establish themselves as a club in the division the MCLA thinks they should be in (DII) before anything is decided. People complaining about their enrollment size and location in a "lacrosse hotbed" reeks of sour grapes to me, from schools looking out for their own best interests, and not those of the PNCLL or MCLA. All I'm hearing is people not wanting Portland State in DII because they're worried they won't be able to compete with a "big" school.

[Steno]

Having a DI football program does not inherently give you better lacrosse players. It is used as litmus test of size. If PSU did have football, they would be DI, I believe.

Or maybe I'm way wrong (wouldn't be the first time).

[woulax23]

I don't think any DII schools are worried about the competition of playing PSU for the next two years, if they are voted into DII for legitimate reasons and they beat us then that is how the game goes. However as was said earlier in this thread, they have lost to more DII teams then they have beaten I believe, so the competition part for the next two years is kind of a moot point. The problem is the stigma that this sets up for the DII as a whole. That is that we are inferior to DI and we only exist to make make the transition into the MCLA easier for teams that are not going to be happy at this level in the long run and also allow some small schools to play. It was kind of evident in Dallas what the national MCLA feeling is towards DII.

Not only that, but just adding and taking teams away from our legitimate division is detrimental to the permanent DI teams. It is seriously a three hour debate every time the number of teams change as to how the DII is going to work that specific season. We cannot get any kind of consistency in our division if we are having to change the conference split, regular season requirements, and post-season because new teams are being added or leaving. Essentially you are asking the nine legitimate teams in the DII to cater to a new team two out of three years in changing our division. Their first season we would need to change to allow them in, the second things would stay the same, then the third we would have to change after they decided that they were moving up from DII.

This is not a knock on PSU, those guys are great and have a good squad and James, their president, is a great guy, a solid leader, and a good lacrosse player. However, this could happen again in the PNCLL. What if a different large university applied for the 2010 season? Would they too be given the easy way in by starting two years in DII? Then that would be four consecutive years of the DII having to possibly change its alignment and regulations. 2009 for PSU coming in, 2010 for [insert name here if they exist] coming in, 2011 for PSU moving up, and 2012 for [insert name here] moving up. A player could potentially have his entire career in college lacrosse and not even experience a schedule or play-off structure that was the same

I just think might be a good option for PSU as a team and a case can probably be made for this being a good option for DI in general, but it is a poor a option for the DII schools who have already established themselves and have paid their dues, literally and figuratively, to our conference. So I would expect that conference to back up these teams first before catering to ANY new teams, not just PSU. It is true that if we don't let new teams in we cannot grow and become better, but we need to make sure that we are taking care of our teams that already exist first.

I thought that everything from the last couple of yeas in the PNCLL has been geared towards getting as much stability as possible for the conference. That is why we had a serious talk about a team like Gonzaga making sure that DI was where they permanently wanted to be, so that we could avoid to flip-flopping of teams from conference to conference. It is tough for DII to be constantly changing and arguing with ourselves every year about how the division will be organized, so to add new teams that want to eventually be in DI into the mix will be extremely frustrating for us.

[Dr. Jason Stockton]

So just so I have this straight, what a lot of you are saying is that even though Portland State isn't a DI football school, which is the criteria the MCLA has for defining DI schools, you want to make them play DI MCLA lacrosse? The "tough love" you want the league to give them can be just as tough in DII as it is in DI. I think they should establish themselves as a club in the division the MCLA thinks they should be in (DII) before anything is decided. People complaining about their enrollment size and location in a "lacrosse hotbed" reeks of sour grapes to me, from schools looking out for their own best interests, and not those of the PNCLL or MCLA. All I'm hearing is people not wanting Portland State in DII because they're worried they won't be able to compete with a "big" school.

Tim, I don't coach any team in this conference. My concern is the movement of teams. I don't want teams moving up and down based on how good their team is going to be in a given year. I've heard it said countless times that the D2 is not a developmental league. If this is true, PSU best fits the MCLA D1 model in every way. . .

If all new teams should be admitted first as D2 teams until they're ready for "prime time," then the D2 is a developmental league. . .which I do not believe is the intent of the MCLA.

[nhoskins]

I've heard it said countless times that the D2 is not a developmental league. If this is true, PSU best fits the MCLA D1 model in every way. . .

If all new teams should be admitted first as D2 teams until they're ready for "prime time," then the D2 is a developmental league. . .which I do not believe is the intent of the MCLA.

PSU best fits the MCLA D1 model in every way... except in the only way that the MCLA defines a D1 school: D1 football.

PSU, by definition, is a D2 team. If they choose to play D1, like the other schools without D1 football (Gonzaga, Simon Fraser, Montana and Idaho), then that's their choice.

(If you've ever seen a Vandal football game, you know they don't have a D1 football team)

[Chris Larson]

Simple solution we use in the UMLL.

In addition to the MCLA mandated D1 football criteria, we also use a school size criteria. I got all the UG population statistics from institutional websites in about 30 minutes and we set it where there was a natural break among our conference members.

Any conference is able to enact bylaws and policies that are more stringent than those of the MCLA as long as they are not counter to MCLA bylaws and policies. (As an example, the WCLL tracks matriculation so their players need to be full time in the fall as well as the spring.)

[nhoskins]

The problem is the stigma that this sets up for the DII as a whole. That is that we are inferior to DI and we only exist to make make the transition into the MCLA easier for teams that are not going to be happy at this level in the long run and also allow some small schools to play. It was kind of evident in Dallas what the national MCLA feeling is towards DII.

In the past two years at Nationals, D2 has had a team refuse to go (Calvin), a team leave early (Irvine), a team elected preseason to play in Nationals (Framingham State) and an AQ winner disqualified (Biola). These are just a few of the reasons why D2 is seen to be "bush league" by some of the D1 folks in Dallas. Its hard for a lot of people to take D2 seriously when the divison is yet to really show a proper 12 team field. Improving the professionalism of the teams involved would be a start. Matching uniforms would be nice too.

[TheBearcatHimself]

Matching uniforms would be nice too.

Well as long as we're not perpetuating stereotypes....

For the record, Portland State University DOES have a D1 football team

The difference is it is D1-AA and the MCLA uses the D1-A as the dividing line. If you are familiar with the difference between D1-A and D1-AA you will know that it comes down simply to scholarships offered and nothing with population size. Portland State is a D1 school, is D1 in every sport, they just happen to be in the sub-classification of D1-AA in football.

[nhoskins]

Portland State is a D1 school, is D1 in every sport, they just happen to be in the sub-classification of D1-AA in football.

And thus, a D2 school as defined by the MCLA.

[Gvlax]

The problem is the stigma that this sets up for the DII as a whole. That is that we are inferior to DI and we only exist to make make the transition into the MCLA easier for teams that are not going to be happy at this level in the long run and also allow some small schools to play. It was kind of evident in Dallas what the national MCLA feeling is towards DII.

In the past two years at Nationals, D2 has had a team refuse to go (Calvin), a team leave early (Irvine), a team elected preseason to play in Nationals (Framingham State) and an AQ winner disqualified (Biola). These are just a few of the reasons why D2 is seen to be "bush league" by some of the D1 folks in Dallas. Its hard for a lot of people to take D2 seriously when the divison is yet to really show a proper 12 team field. Improving the professionalism of the teams involved would be a start. Matching uniforms would be nice too.

It doesnt happen as often in D1 because D1 is more established... for the top 20 maybe. I always wondered what would happen if some random team shot up in the league and made it to nationals if they have never been there before. I would love to see how they do it. I think there are "bush league" D1 schools out there. D1 is just lucky they have 16 teams that are not.

As for calvin, There finals are the week of nationals. Order of priorities 1) Family 2) School 3) Lacrosse. No other order

[Ryan Hanavan]

Portland State is a D1 school, is D1 in every sport, they just happen to be in the sub-classification of D1-AA in football.

Correction:
D1 - Football Championship Subdivision (I hope the guy who thought that up was fired).

I think the message that keeps bubbling to the top is having a coaching staff committed to making the team competitive. The teams that win the national championship have established systems in place from coaching staff out. The MCLA is definitely looking at some growing pains down the line. There will be teams that can grow into systems similar to the top 15 MCLA programs and there will be teams that can't. If PSU is in a "hotbed" then they should have eligible, qualified coaches that could compete for the position. That will go a long way in bringing more talent out come fall. They need a Will Moss too, every team needs a Will Moss.

[Mark Brown]

Chris Larson, What is the enrollment # that you use in the UMLL?? How did you come up w/ it? Was most of the league in agreement? Do you think that it works well in the UMLL? Any help on this topic is greatly appreciated.

[Chris Larson]

When I assembled the student populations of our member schools, I just listed them in an excel table. The natural break (which was near where we thought it should be) was really obvious, so we proposed 12,000 undergraduates as the criteria for mandatory UMLL D1 status.

The league voted to accept this criteria. I don't recall the margin, but don't remember it being contriversial. Thata's probably because small schools were then allowed to petition to play in the larger division. Team reps were asked to make a presentation. Some teams did well, some teams did poorly. The entire league voted on each individual petition and our D2 (formerly Div B) was formed. I'll be honest and state that at that time, a lot of the evaluation was based on competitiveness.

We did not have (nor have we ever had) any large institution teams interested in playing in the small school division.

The schools that were denied D1 status were initially disappointed, but ended up embracing the idea that we would support them as an equal to D1 and the result is we have 2 big time players in D2 and 3 or so up and comers. The addition of the D2 National tournament really validated this assignmant for these teams

It sounds to me as though you'll have a tough time placing 1 or 2 teams.