LaxTV Forums | A Forum About The MCLA

So here are the final scores from all of the games.

Saturday Day 1
Montana 12 - Whitman 2
U of Idaho 8 - Albertsons 7
Montana State 7 - Utah 2
U of Montana 19? - U of Idaho 2
Whitman 6 - Albersons 2
BSU 7 - Montana State 4
Whitman ? - Utah (W) ?
BSU 5 - U of Montana 11

Sunday Day 2
Utah 7 - Idaho 9
BSU 8 - Montana State 7
Albertsons 6 - Whitman 5 (OT)
U of Idaho 2 - BSU 7


Championship Game
U of Montana 5 - BSU 3

Thank You to all of the teams that made it out to Boise for the 8th Annual Gem State Lacrosse Tournament.

There was nice weather all day Saturday where the sun warmed the day for some great lacrosse. Each team came out ready to play with helmets and lacrosse sticks in hand.

Games were played till about 4 o'clock on Saturday and would kick off again on Sunday at 9:30am.

On Sunday there was more great weather but with more of an overcast, making it not as hot. Teams came out to play knowing that this could be it. Game scores were much closer this day, with more exciting lacrosse to be played. Each team played hard till the end, fighting for the spot in the championship game against the University of Montana.

BSU and the University of Montana faced-off in the championship game while the rest of the teams enjoyed the show as well as the food and drink at the BBQ.

In the end the University of Montana walked away with the title and Plaque of Gem State Champs. Congratulations, and thanks again to everyone for coming out.

Lax4LifeGoalie wrote:
U of Idaho 8 - Albertsons 7
U of Montana 19? - U of Idaho 2
BSU 7 - Montana State 4
BSU 5 - U of Montana 11
Utah 7 - Idaho 9
BSU 8 - Montana State 7
U of Idaho 2 - BSU 7
U of Montana 5 - BSU 3

Judging by these scores (and I know its just fall ball), UI and BSU are terrible and have no chance of winning an A div. game, even against a team like OSU!!
Why are these teams in the A div. and teams like Montana in the B div??
Why can't they just switch positions??

On the lighter side of things, UW looks to be having some success in the fall season... Good luck down in Eugene!!

BSU is expected to finish 4th this year in the preseason poll for the Div A bracket in the PNCLL. I know that it is just a poll, but it is based on how last year was played. Judging that we only graduated 3 players, I see no reason why BSU cant be a Div A team and compete at the same level that we did last year.

But on other terms it is JUST Fall ball and the score doesnt really matter because its purpose is to gives teams a chance to give exposure to new recruits and get a head start for the Spring season, so everyone plays and everyone learns before the season ever starts.

The University of Montana finished 6th last year in Div B play out of 88 teams so with that said they are a PRETTY GOOD Team! I got to see them play and there is no reason why they cant compete at a Div A level, but because they beat BSU doesn't mean that BSU cant compete at a Div A level.

If you could have watched the championship game from the Gem State Tournament, you would have seen that the game played between BSU and U of Montana was a great game. If you think Montana should be an A team, then BSU proved they could compete with them if they were an A team, based on how each team played in that game.

Scrape Mode wrote:Why are these teams in the A div. and teams like Montana in the B div??
Why can't they just switch positions??

I'm not sure how many teams you insulted in this post but your efficiency was impressive. Beyond that, though, these teams are in their respective divisions because of a stupid league rule that doesn't make sense - apparently the size of a school's football program has *any* bearing on their lacrosse potential. Nevermind the fact that placing teams in situations that they can't compete in hampers their ability to recruit quality players and coaches and therefore precludes them from building up their program to the level of the teams that they are just supposed to be able to compete with by default.
Meanwhile fantastic programs like Montana, who as I understand it would love to move up to division A, are put in division B where they clobber everyone. Stupid.

Montana can petition to move up. Just like san Diego and Claremont this season. Or UCSB and Sonoma from the very start.

Petition should have nothing to do with it. Divisions should be arranged by what is most competetive and what will foster the most amount of growth for all teams - not just a few.

Band wrote:Petition should have nothing to do with it. Divisions should be arranged by what is most competetive and what will foster the most amount of growth for all teams - not just a few.

But you said Montana was "put" in Division B. (Like they can't play anywhere else.)

Montana is free to petition to move up to Division A whenever they want.... And if the PNCLL leadership agrees, the Griz would be competiting in Division A.

Sonny wrote:

Band wrote:Petition should have nothing to do with it. Divisions should be arranged by what is most competetive and what will foster the most amount of growth for all teams - not just a few.

But you said Montana was "put" in Division B. (Like they can't play anywhere else.)

Montana is free to petition to move up to Division A whenever they want.... And if the PNCLL leadership agrees, the Griz would be competiting in Division A.

Sonny's correct. When the split happened, Montana wanted to be in the B Division. They were also given the opportunity to petition at the AGM this year & chose not to. 3 years ago they weren't winning games like this & competetive ability shouldn't be judged on 2 fantastic years. I'd like to see them in the A due to school size, but that's not the rule & they want to solidify their program before they move up. I can't blame them.

Band, if you want more games to play, easier games to play, schedule them. Teams are out there, willing to take an extra game here & there. You're on the right track playing Fall Ball now.

On a side note

Are you not allowed to petition to move down a division?

Ok, I'm not 100% sure, but I do not believe so. I believe we voted that into the bylaws, but even if we did, we have a committee revamping them right now so next year it may be a mute point.

The discussion we had 2 years ago @ the AGM was essentially that if a team such as BSU wants in, & they're an A division team, we didn't want them to play down. BSU was forced to play in the B in their previous conference, which made their team ineligible for the B tournament as well as league honors.

Part of the logic was that if they were to win the B division title, they would receive our AQ... which they would not be able to take... & leaving us in a strange position. I know when I was voting I wanted to keep A teams in the A division. The 2 divisions should be distinct, not a warm up division & the big show. Our B division schools are typically tiny, they take the game seriously, but a school like Whitman has less than 1500 at school to make a team. I'm guessing at Oregon you have 1500+ kids that have played lax before, let alone the recruits & top tier talent coming to play at Oregon. Maybe the solution you're looking for is a C division? I don't know if logistically it's possible, referees & coaches are already is short supply in many of these areas but who knows what the future will hold. It might be the right move for us to allow teams to develop.

Kyle Berggren wrote: Band, if you want more games to play, easier games to play, schedule them. Teams are out there, willing to take an extra game here & there. You're on the right track playing Fall Ball now.

The issue is that we are forced to spend a huge portion of our travel budget going to play teams that are way beyond our competitive level, which has 3 effects:

1. It cuts down on the resources we have to spend on playing teams that are on our level.
2. Our division record goes to hell making recruiting harder and harder every year. We used to get a huge crop of players from the Boise area - this year we got zero freshman from there.
3. It makes it hard to maintain players who don't necessarily want to spend their time and money traveling to the coast to get bent over.

Why not use B division as a "warm up" when it is appropriate? The goal of this league should be to promote growth, and if starting a new team in a division that is competitive until they can build their program to move up is how to do that then I don't see the problem at all. What about WSU? When they join the league they are going to get worked up and down the street (just like us). That won't help them build their program. They should get time to play teams that will give them a good game. If they improve and should be moved up then so be it.
Keeping noncompetetive teams in the A division is a waste of time and money for everyone. Of what benefit is it to Oregon to play Idaho? This year they will have to spend a bunch of money to drive 9 hours to Moscow to demolish a team with their 3rd string.


PS - Sonny, glad to see that you haven't lost your ability to ignore the point and argue semantics.

I'll try & take some time tonight or tomorrow to write a more formal out response, but my initial impression is that you're asking the league stop thinking about itself & start thinking about the growth of lacrosse.

The first thing I notice about what you're asking is this section...

Band wrote:"Why not use B division as a "warm up" when it is appropriate? The goal of this league should be to promote growth, and if starting a new team in a division that is competitive until they can build their program to move up is how to do that then I don't see the problem at all. What about WSU? When they join the league they are going to get worked up and down the street (just like us). That won't help them build their program. They should get time to play teams that will give them a good game. If they improve and should be moved up then so be it."

Why not join the PNCLL & MCLA when your team is ready to compete at it's level? What's wrong with scheduling these games & building your team before you join the conference? Why should the MCLA differentiate divisions & then allow your program to develop under its wing? I see a problem in that Idaho, a larger public school, competing year in and year out with Albertson or Whitman (schools of much smaller size(900-1500 students)) is absolutely outside of the realm of fair to those smaller teams.

Recruiting problems for you teams most likely stem a lot further than just wins & losses. Whether Oregon is dominant this year, last year, 10 years ago or 10 years from now is not really a huge concern in my book. They are 1 of 18 teams. Granted they may be the model of how to build a program in such a short time, but still only one team.

If you don't feel Idaho program is ready to be in the PNCLL as it stands, you may want to be ready to address the board & the committee redoing the bylaws this season & prepare to address the conference at next years AGM. Jason Stockton would probably be the best person to speak with, as he is the president, & is not affiliated with a team right now. He may have a different perspective that meshs more with your view.

Band wrote:Petition should have nothing to do with it. Divisions should be arranged by what is most competetive and what will foster the most amount of growth for all teams - not just a few.

I'd also be curious what you're referring to when you infer the divisions are arranged to foster the growth of just a few?