MCLA-2 #8,#9,#10,#11 Don't Make National Tournament

[Buc_em_up]

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?

He is saying that due to the sheer area covered by the SELC that travel costs just to get to an area that is out of conference costs more money than in a smaller conference, shutting out teams with less resources. I dodon'tnow if this is true or untrue, just trying to clarify.

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.

This is a really unrealistic apapproacho the problem. Sure it is one thing for a program with lots of money to schedule multiple OOC games but if a team is struggling to get money to even play a full conference schedule, how can we ask them to schedule two, more expensive games in addition to their conference schedule? If teams were dropped from the MCLA for not meeting this requirement then we would lose a lot of programs and that would hold back Div. II even more.
The real problem for such small schools is money, I think that everyone can agree on this and if we were to kick schools out for not having enough money, that would really be detrimental.

[BB]

No team "has' money. or few at most.

All teams can "raise" money.

[Jolly Roger]

Buc,

The other side of your argument is whether these teams that will have difficulty meeting a nationally mandated OCC standard are truly ready to be a part of our organization.

I think every conference has teams that don't quite meet the minimums and we spend a lot of our local recources babying these teams along. Might everyone be better served if those teams were part of a different organization? Less demands on a team not prepared and less time spent by conferences having to check up on them.

[Buc_em_up]

I certainly see what you mean Jolly Roger,

I agree that there are plenty of teams in the MCLA that are not ready to play at a national level. I know that DII isn't supposed to be a developmental league. Are there other leagues that teams must start to dominate before they are allowed to move into the MCLA?

What will happen if a school wants to start a team, they have some players, but cant "raise" much money? If we don't let them into the MCLA who will they play? Sure they could play MCLA schools but why would the independent teams want to play a school for no reason and why would the MCLA school play a school that is not in any sort of league?

Are you suggesting a developmental league below DII I don't want to start this whole developmental discussion again, but where will new teams go if the MCLA wont take them? Everyone gets so excited to hear about lacrosse in new places, and maybe the MCLA isn't the place for new teams, but why inadvertently stunt the growth of the sport?

It just seems like a bad idea to get too exclusive. Just because some teams have been success and can afford to travel all over the country doesn't mean that we should kick out those who haven't progressed as far.

[Jolly Roger]

These teams can develop in the SWLA, GLLL, NCCL, GPLL. It seems like we're trying at times to fit a square peg n a round hole.

I don't think the MCLA should be a catchall for college lacrosse. I also don't think we're responsible for managing the growth of the game.

I do think we're responsible for providing a unique experience for college athletes looking for something more than the traditional club sport can offer.

[gibertjs]

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.

I'd agree with this completely. It really is not difficult at all to schedule OOC games if teams put in effort and get a little creative. If every team in Div 2 hosted one OOC game and traveled to another as a requirement, the entire problem is solved. You have one home game which costs whatever a home game costs, and you have one OOC game that you have to travel to. Most teams can reach an OOC opponent for only an hour-two hours extra driving from their most distant conference opponent. Some teams (not Many, but some) have OOC opponents closer than conference opponents because of border lines between conferences.

[GCCLAX3]

In all honesty, I can not understand why teams struggle to find 2 OOC games. At Grove City, we have managed to do it every year and we are not what would be seen as a powerhouse (We are trying to get there and things are looking good even already this year). We have very limited resources and are further hampered by the fact that we are required by our school to travel by bus (Cheaper to drive individually). We do it because it does provide a better experience for players, and by not playing OOC games you are hurting your own development and taking a little bit of legitmacy away from the MCLA.

OOC Trips are always a great bonding experience for a team. It is not that hard to get 2 in a single weekend. This is what we have usually done, and you only have to pay for a long trip once.

[Buc_em_up]

I'm not trying to say that teams shouldnt play OOC games, I think they should, and for the most part agree with your guys. I just dont like hearing the word "required" when it comes to something that could eat up a huge bit of a teams budget. Maybe it should be something like teams are required to schedule two OOC games, incase the other teams folds on them, or giving the team the flexibility to only play 1 or 0 OOC games if they forsee a financial troubles.

I do agree about the team bonding, the experiece it provides, and the higher level of play that OOC games can provide for a team and the MCLA. I certainly suggest it, but require is a strong word for teams that have to make their money go further.