North and South Division

by **cgibber13** on Wed Feb 02, 2005 1:42 pm

I was wondering if anyone can tell me why the Number 2(UT),3(TT),4(SMU),6(BU),7(UNT) team are all in the same division and the 1(AM),5(TSU),8(UH),9(TU),10(RU),11(LSU) are in the other. IMO the number 3,4,5,6,7 teams are all about even, all these teams have a shot at finishing 3rd or second barring some collapse, in the league and they are all in the same division. I just seems to me that the North is loaded. Open for your thoughts!! Thanks

**Sponsor**

by **shrekjr** on Wed Feb 02, 2005 2:18 pm

South/East, North/West.

If you had to draw one line to split into two divisions, how would you rather do it? Besides, only one team is going to Minnesota.

by **cgibber13** on Wed Feb 02, 2005 2:24 pm

I understand only one team is going to nationals, but pending on the LSA tournament setup and great team in the north wont make the playoffs and a avg. team from the south will. For most teams outside the top three in the league, just making the playoffs is what it is all about.

by **cgibber13** on Wed Feb 02, 2005 2:36 pm

two divisions

A&M Texas
SMU Texas Tech
BU TSU
UNT Tulane
UH LSU
Rice Ok. St.

Listed these teams best to worst
if each of these teams played the team listed across form them, they would all be close games. Even split in my mind. Getting a true representation in the LSA tourn.

by **shrekjr** on Wed Feb 02, 2005 2:43 pm

I understand what you're saying, but you can't redo the divisions each year based on pre-season standing of how good you THINK a team will be.

The other consideration is why most divisions are set up the way they are in all sports....geographically. Can you imagine how much more it would cost to travel to all those schools much further away, while passing by schools closer to you?

While there is some logic to your point, it just isn't realistic for many more reasons.

by **LaxC21** on Wed Feb 02, 2005 3:01 pm

Let me start off by saying this is clearly a conspiracy to ensure that the little people will always be disenfranchised and to keep the big man on top.

Just kidding...as you probably know, money is a big issue in the league and with the teams in the LSA. As I understand it, the divisions were split due to geographical reasons and budget concerns and it's that simple.

If you take how you rated the teams at face value (I disagree by the way)...at this point in time there happens to be higher quality opponents in the north division. However, I happen to believe that it is too early to tell the quality of the opponents in the two divisions. I expect Baylor, TSU and U of H to be better than they were last year. For the north, historically SMU starts out fast and ends short of their potential, Tech starts out slow and finishes great. My point being you could see some unexpected upsets that would possibly change your current rankings, but only time will tell. Lastly, I would hope that the majority of the teams are in the LSA to compete and go to St. Louis, not just make it to the playoffs and better competition helps you get better prepared for that.

by **yoink** on Wed Feb 02, 2005 3:12 pm

Geographically it does make sense to divvy it up that way. But you gotta wonder who set these up. It looks easy for TAMU but they still do play TTU and UT :twisted:

by **tamu33** on Wed Feb 02, 2005 3:23 pm

One thing you have got to stop saying in this thread is that only one team from the LSA can go to nationals. Three years back texas was the last team out of the tournament. The LSA-AQ is the only guaranteed team going to nationals but some teams in the LSA have the eligibility to go as at-large bids.

As for the split between the north and south divisions. I think that the teams are split pretty evenly. For obvious reasons one would not want to put Texas Tech or Okie State in the same division as Tulane or LSU. And the league coordinators don't want the two top teams in the same division either. The split seemed pretty logical to me. The only quam I have with the divisions is that Baylor is not in the South and Texas State is not in the North.

by **cgibber13** on Wed Feb 02, 2005 3:29 pm

I like everyones pts. and thanks for the healthy discussion. I hope to see the south really set it up soon. I would like to see A&M challenged in their own division.

by **jessexy** on Wed Feb 02, 2005 3:42 pm

So I guess we can all agree is saying that there is STILL no coach of the TAMU Women's Lax team! :twisted:

by **mikeg123** on Wed Feb 02, 2005 3:52 pm

"The only quam I have with the divisions is that Baylor is not in the South and Texas State is not in the North."

somehow from a geographical sense (south & north) this does not make sense to me

by **tamu33** on Wed Feb 02, 2005 4:06 pm

mikeg123,

The problem I have is that Baylor is closer to TAMU than it is to texas and that Texas State is closer to texas than TAMU.

San Marcos is farther south than Waco but I think that in this case traveling teams like Tech and Okie State would be able to knock out two birds with one stone. They can travel to texas and then play Texas State instead of driving another three hours northeast to Baylor. And it is easier for Tulane and LSU to hit TAMU and Baylor in the same day than TAMU and Texas State. That is where I had the problem.

by **benji** on Wed Feb 02, 2005 4:49 pm

Maybe they could change league requirements/ ranking systems so that there are 5 teams in the playoffs. The fifth team would be ranked based upon non-divisional games played (i.e. TTU vs. TAMU or UT vs. TSU). Then, this "wildcard" would compete with the lowest seeded playoff team for the #4 spot?

Its not much, but it would provide for more heated intra-divisional gameplay, and maybe a more well balanced playoff schematic.

... my two cents.

by **cgibber13** on Wed Feb 02, 2005 6:06 pm

The division still seem lop-sided to me. You have TAMU,and TSU challenged by no one for the 1st and 2nd spot in the north. You have UT,TT, BU, SMU, and UNT all of equal caliber on most days fighting it out for first and second. Don't get me wrong, it will fun to see how the North pans out. I know you can't make everyone happy, but when TCU and Trinity, and Southwestern step up their progams in the next couple of years which I expect they will, maybe a restructuring is in order.

by **Gary Robinson** on Wed Feb 02, 2005 6:30 pm

Once again, you don't base these divisions upon the teams' current level of play, you base it upon geography for efficiency of travel. That is a constant, whether team X, Y or Z are competitive from year to year is irrelevant.

Don't expect Trinity and Southwestern to be moving to the A division anytime soon. The B division was created for schools just like those, very small private schools, to give them a forum of competition where they can contend from year to year.

The playoff format this year includes a quarterfinal weekend so all of the teams that are good will have a chance to play for the LSA title.